Re: [SQL] Operator Precedence problem?

2000-08-12 Thread Tom Lane
Philip Warner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Which makes me think that the precedence of 'or' is not what I > expected. OR is certainly lower-precedence than AND --- this is hard-wired in the grammar and not subject to change across databases. It's also required by SQL92: ::=

Re: [SQL] Operator Precedence problem?

2000-08-12 Thread Philip Warner
At 08:53 12/08/00 -0500, John McKown wrote: >Every language that I've ever used (other than APL) has the precedence of >"or" being less than "and". So I would always expect the "and" clauses to >be evaluated first, then the "or". Just like in math, where in an >equation, I expect that the multipli

Re: [SQL] Operator Precedence problem?

2000-08-12 Thread John McKown
Every language that I've ever used (other than APL) has the precedence of "or" being less than "and". So I would always expect the "and" clauses to be evaluated first, then the "or". Just like in math, where in an equation, I expect that the multiplication (and) is done before the addition (or). U

Re: [SQL] Week of the Year?

2000-08-12 Thread John McKown
Sorry, I don't speak TCL or TK. I've got a book on it, but I haven't had any time or pressing need to get familiar with it. I'm learning Python & PHP. Well, at least I'm trying to whenever I can find a spare moment (which is rare). On Sat, 12 Aug 2000, David Lloyd-Jones wrote: > John, > > Many