[fpc-pascal] precedence "is" and "and"

[Marco van de Voort]

Op 2018-12-08 om 22:03 schreef Michael Van Canneyt:
>
>> I don't see where the bitwise should be involved here. There is no
>> integer.
>> The docs do not mention a different precedence lvl for logical/bitwise
>> "and".
>
My line of thought was the docs might mean bitwise there.

> Because to the best of my knowledge, here isn't any difference in
> precedence, so there is nothing to explain.
>
And that was what my post was, checking that.

I'm more of the "more parenthesis never hurt anybody" school, so 
operator precedence beyond the normal mathematical is not my strong point.


> I must confess it assumes that the reader knows what logical 'and' and 
> 'or'
> means, but someone who does not know that will probably not read the 
> docs.
> (although, he will also not understand "not" either and maybe read the 
> docs...)
>
Maybe clarify that?