"Timon Gehr" <timon.g...@gmx.ch> wrote in message news:jjpmov$305u$1...@digitalmars.com... > On 03/14/2012 01:20 AM, Nick Sabalausky wrote: >> "Timon Gehr"<timon.g...@gmx.ch> wrote in message > >>> >> << >>> // 8 shift operators >>> == !=> < >=<= \ // 9 relational operators >>> !> !< !>= !<=<>\ >>> !<> <>= !<>= in \ >>> !in is !is >>> & // 10 bitwise AND (ambiguous with 9) >>> ^ // 11 bitwise XOR (ambiguous with 9) >>> | // 12 bitwise OR (ambiguous with 9) >> >> Ah, see, that's what I was tripping up on. I thought there seemed to be >> something slightly odd going on with those (and then from there I started >> second-guessing everything). It seemed almost like these had both ordered >> priorities *and* the same priority. >> >> So how exactly does this part work then? >> > > It is a special case. If a bitwise operator appears next to a relational > operator, then the expression has to be parenthesised for disambiguation. > You can think of it as a partial order: > > ... > | > shift operators > ^ ^ > / \ > / bitwise AND > / \ > / bitwise XOR > / \ > relational operators bitwise OR > ^ ^ > \ / > \ / > \ / > \ / > logical AND > ^ > | > logical OR > ^ > | > ... > > The precedence of bitwise operators cannot be compared with the precedence > of relational operators, and D disallows programs that cannot be parsed > unambiguously.
Ok, I see. Thanks.
