# What Is Precedence Rule

What about 8 – 3+ 4? Is it like (8 – 3) + 4 = 9 or 8 – (3 + 4) = 1? Here, the rule is slightly different. Neither + nor – takes precedence over the other. Instead, the – and + are simply made from left to right. This rule also deals with the case of 8 – 4 – 3. Is it (8 – 4) – 3 = 1 or is it 8 – (4 – 3) = 7? Subtractions are done from left to right, so it`s 1, not 7. A similar rule from left to right handles bindings between x and /. For a long time, the operator with the lowest priority was the operator, the operator. The , operator is used to evaluate two expressions one after the other. For example: In some applications and programming languages, especially Microsoft Excel, PlanMaker (and other spreadsheets) and the programming language bc, unary operators have a higher priority than binary operators, that is, the least unary has a higher priority than potentiation, so in these languages −32 is interpreted as (−3)2 = 9. [21] This does not apply to the binary operator minus −; for example, in Microsoft Excel, while the formulas =−2^2, =-(2)^2, and =0+−2^2 return 4, the formulas return =0−2^2 and =−(2^2) −4. The same argument we used to explain why! has a high ranking works even better and explains why -> has an even higher priority.

In fact, -> has the highest priority of all. If ## and @@ are two operators, then: We really hope that this will be the case (2). For (2) to occur, && must have a precedent less than ==; If the rank is higher, we get (3) or (4), which would be terrible. So && has a lower priority than ==. If this seems like an obvious decision, keep in mind that Pascal was wrong. This assigns @list to have an element (gold), and then executes the next two expressions one by one, which is unnecessary. So this is a great example of a case where the default priority rules don`t do what we want. But people already have a habit of putting parentheses around the items on their list, so no one cares much, and the problem is not a problem at all. The collation rules for the older version of MQL4 are shown below. No one knows a very good solution to this problem, and different languages solve it in different ways. For example, the APL language, which completely does without a whole series of unknown operators such as ρ and , and solves them all from right to left. The advantage of this is that we do not have to remember the rules, and the disadvantage is that many expressions are confusing: if we write 2 x 3 + 4, you get 14, not 10.

In LISP, the problem never occurs because in LISP parentheses are required and therefore there are no ambiguous expressions. (Now you know why LISP looks the way it does.) That would certainly be weird. The very low ranking of , ensures that we can write: There are a number of geographically different methods to remember the basic ranking rules, e.B. PEMDAS in the United States. The creator of the C language said about the priority in C (which is shared by programming languages that borrow these rules from C, for example, C++, Perl, and PHP) that it would have been better to move the binary operators to the comparison operators. [27] However, many programmers have become accustomed to this order. The relative ranks of the operators found in many C-style languages are as follows: This tries to open a file descriptor, and if this is not possible, it cancels the program with an error message. Now look at what happens if we leave the parentheses out of the open call: each group of operations in the table has the same priority. The higher the priority of operations, the higher the position of the group in the table. Priority rules determine the grouping of operations and operands.

This is totally weird, because the die is only executed if the string „<\$file" is wrong, which never happens. Since the die is controlled by the channel and not by the open call, the program will not give up as we wanted in case of errors. Here we want || had a lower priority, so we could write: an expression like 1/2x is interpreted by TI-82 as 1/(2x), as are many modern Casio calculators,[23] but as (1/2)x by TI-83 and all other TI calculators published since 1996,[24] as well as by all Hewlett-Packard calculators with algebraic notation. While the first interpretation may be expected by some users due to the nature of implicit multiplication, the second is more consistent with the standard rule that multiplication and division are of equal priority,[25][26] where 1/2x one is halved and the response multiplied by x is read. . . .