Sign Up to our social questions and Answers Engine to ask questions, answer people’s questions, and connect with other people.
Login to our social questions & Answers Engine to ask questions answer people’s questions & connect with other people.
Lost your password? Please enter your email address. You will receive a link and will create a new password via email.
Please briefly explain why you feel this question should be reported.
Please briefly explain why you feel this answer should be reported.
Please briefly explain why you feel this user should be reported.
This:
if (A || B) { X; }
if (C && D) { X; }
if (F != G && H + I === J) { X; }
Can be replaced by:
if ((A || B) || (C && D) || (F != G && H + I === J)) { X; }
But can it be replaced by:
if (A || B || C && D || F != G && H + I === J) { X; }
? (Without parentheses)
And is there any difference between languages?
P.S: The answers shouldn’t based on those examples.
One, this is all invalid if these have side-effects.
Two, only if X is idempotent, which is a fancy way of saying, if X can be called twice with no change on the second time.
http://en.cppreference.com/w/cpp/language/operator_precedence
&&binds tigther than||, so yes, you may drop parens around&&in this context. The operator precedence rules I believe hold valid for any language that has them, I don’t know any counterexamples to this, and the languages you asked about do follow C operator precedence rules.