Then you're forcing the maintainers to memorize an operator precedence table to infer your meaning, instead of writing it explictly.
Notice the word "clarity" in my original sentence. You seem to have missed it the first time through. Or maybe you just didn't understand what I meant. Statements where a maintainer is forced to memorize precedence tables are NOT clear, and hence fall under my "clarity" caveat.
In reply to Re^3: What's so bad about &function(...)?
by revdiablo
in thread What's so bad about &function(...)?
by japhy
| For: | Use: | ||
| & | & | ||
| < | < | ||
| > | > | ||
| [ | [ | ||
| ] | ] |