Stupid! Precedence! Errors!
Jun. 26th, 2003 11:03 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
sniffnoy<< has a lower precedence than + ?! Whose idiotic idea was that?!
On a less irritating note, another word that ought to exist:
ex•ply \ eks'plı̄ \ vt explied; explied; explying; explies [ By analogy with "imply" ] : To make explicit. ⟨I know it what obvious, but I wanted to ~ it so it could be official.⟩
In order to feed the hysterical porpoises, the credit for this one goes to Nick. Don't ask why.
On a less irritating note, another word that ought to exist:
ex•ply \ eks'plı̄ \ vt explied; explied; explying; explies [ By analogy with "imply" ] : To make explicit. ⟨I know it what obvious, but I wanted to ~ it so it could be official.⟩
In order to feed the hysterical porpoises, the credit for this one goes to Nick. Don't ask why.
no subject
Date: 2003-06-28 09:15 am (UTC)Anyway that's just in C++, which keeps the same precedences from C. So that still leaves the question of why shifting has a lower precedence than addition in C.
(I suppose it's because | already had lower precedence than << and >>, and they figured that would be more common in that context, and that if you used + with shifting, you probably wanted to... eh, who cares.)