RE: NASL2: precedence of 'logical NOT'

On Sun, 2003-02-16 at 10:12, Jim Cervantes wrote:
> Isn't it true that most programming languages give unary operators very high
> precedence?

Well, that's what C does. But I'm not sure it is a good example (e.g.
the precedence of & and | is *bad*)

>  I have always found this easy on the brain since it translates
> into unary operators always binding to tokens that immediately follow.
> Won't most people with at least some programming experience find what you
> are suggesting to be unfamiliar?

Then there is another possibility: implement additional logical
operators (and, or, not) with very low precedence, like in Perl.

! x == y   <=> (! x) == y
not x == y <=> ! (x == y)

This means that ! x >< y is buggy code.
egrep '! *[_a-zA-z0-9-]+.*><' *.nasl   does not return any suspicious
code in the current plugins.

And it seems that nobody had the bad idea of calling a variable 'and'
'or' or 'not'. Good.