Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.c > #162643
| From | Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.c |
| Subject | Re: C precedence - relative comparisons before equality operators |
| Date | 2021-09-06 13:44 +0100 |
| Organization | A noiseless patient Spider |
| Message-ID | <87eea1kh4x.fsf@bsb.me.uk> (permalink) |
| References | <sh2vvh$oir$1@dont-email.me> <precedence-20210905232846@ram.dialup.fu-berlin.de> <sh4jd4$7q8$1@dont-email.me> |
James Harris <james.harris.1@gmail.com> writes: > On 05/09/2021 23:29, Stefan Ram wrote: >> James Harris <james.harris.1@gmail.com> writes: >>> Anyone know why the precedences were designed that way? >> The precedence of > < <= >= over == != was already >> present in B. > > Was that in just some versions of B? It looks as though relational and > equality comparisons are at the same level in > > https://www.thinkage.ca/gcos/expl/b/manu/manu.html#AppendixB > > Of course, that may not be right but I wonder if Thompson changed from > one set of precedence levels to the other, and why. Strange. The GCOS version was the only one I ever used, but I have no memory of the operator precedence. >> Kernighan/Ritchie wrote: >> |The == (equal to) and the != (not equal to) operators are >> |analogous to the relational operators except for their lower >> |precedence. (Thus a<b == c<d is 1 whenever a<b and c<d have >> |the same truth-value.) > > Do you have a link to the source of that? It's from the C book (K&R). Section 7.7 190, page 190 in the 1st edition. -- Ben.
Back to comp.lang.c | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
C precedence - relative comparisons before equality operators James Harris <james.harris.1@gmail.com> - 2021-09-05 18:49 +0100
Re: C precedence - relative comparisons before equality operators Siri Cruise <chine.bleu@yahoo.com> - 2021-09-05 13:11 -0700
Re: C precedence - relative comparisons before equality operators Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2021-09-05 21:12 +0100
Re: C precedence - relative comparisons before equality operators David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2021-09-06 09:09 +0200
Re: C precedence - relative comparisons before equality operators gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2021-09-05 20:19 +0000
Re: C precedence - relative comparisons before equality operators Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2021-09-05 17:52 -0400
Re: C precedence - relative comparisons before equality operators Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2021-09-06 00:09 +0100
Re: C precedence - relative comparisons before equality operators David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2021-09-06 09:15 +0200
Re: C precedence - relative comparisons before equality operators Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2021-09-06 11:10 +0100
Re: C precedence - relative comparisons before equality operators David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2021-09-06 13:01 +0200
Re: C precedence - relative comparisons before equality operators Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2021-09-06 04:20 -0700
Re: C precedence - relative comparisons before equality operators John Bode <jfbode1029@gmail.com> - 2021-09-07 09:27 -0500
Re: C precedence - relative comparisons before equality operators Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2021-09-08 00:20 +0100
Re: C precedence - relative comparisons before equality operators John Bode <jfbode1029@gmail.com> - 2021-09-08 14:18 -0500
Re: C precedence - relative comparisons before equality operators Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2021-09-06 02:01 +0100
Re: C precedence - relative comparisons before equality operators James Harris <james.harris.1@gmail.com> - 2021-09-06 09:39 +0100
Re: C precedence - relative comparisons before equality operators Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2021-09-06 10:46 +0100
Re: C precedence - relative comparisons before equality operators Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2021-09-06 10:09 -0400
Re: C precedence - relative comparisons before equality operators Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2021-09-06 16:05 +0100
Re: C precedence - relative comparisons before equality operators James Harris <james.harris.1@gmail.com> - 2021-09-06 09:27 +0100
Re: C precedence - relative comparisons before equality operators James Harris <james.harris.1@gmail.com> - 2021-09-06 12:18 +0100
Re: C precedence - relative comparisons before equality operators David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2021-09-06 13:44 +0200
Re: C precedence - relative comparisons before equality operators James Harris <james.harris.1@gmail.com> - 2021-09-06 13:38 +0100
Re: C precedence - relative comparisons before equality operators David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2021-09-06 18:12 +0200
Re: C precedence - relative comparisons before equality operators tth <tth@none.invalid> - 2021-09-06 18:20 +0200
Re: C precedence - relative comparisons before equality operators David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2021-09-06 23:40 +0200
Re: C precedence - relative comparisons before equality operators Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2021-09-06 17:20 -0700
Re: C precedence - relative comparisons before equality operators Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2021-09-06 13:44 +0100
Re: C precedence - relative comparisons before equality operators Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2021-09-06 17:23 -0700
Re: C precedence - relative comparisons before equality operators James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2021-09-06 23:07 -0400
csiph-web