Skip to content

Conversation

chanmmn
Copy link

@chanmmn chanmmn commented Jun 30, 2022

Line 101 should be
The Conditional AND operator && also computes the logical AND of its operands, but always evaluates both operands.
instead of
The Logical AND operator & also computes the logical AND of its operands, but always evaluates both operands.
Line 111 should be
The Conditional OR operator || also computes the logical OR of its operands, but always evaluates both operands.
instead of
The Logical OR operator | also computes the logical OR of its operands, but always evaluates both operands.

Summary

Describe your changes here.

Fixes #Issue_Number (if available)

Line 101 should be
The [Conditional AND operator](#logical-and-operator-) `&&` also computes the logical AND of its operands, but always evaluates both operands.
instead of 
The [Logical AND operator](#logical-and-operator-) `&` also computes the logical AND of its operands, but always evaluates both operands.
Line 111 should be
The [Conditional OR operator](#logical-or-operator-) `||` also computes the logical OR of its operands, but always evaluates both operands.
instead of 
The [Logical OR operator](#logical-or-operator-) `|` also computes the logical OR of its operands, but always evaluates both operands.
@chanmmn
Copy link
Author

chanmmn commented Jun 30, 2022

Line 101 should be The Conditional AND operator && also computes the logical AND of its operands, but always evaluates both operands. instead of The Logical AND operator & also computes the logical AND of its operands, but always evaluates both operands. Line 111 should be The Conditional OR operator || also computes the logical OR of its operands, but always evaluates both operands. instead of The Logical OR operator | also computes the logical OR of its operands, but always evaluates both operands.

Summary

Describe your changes here.

Fixes #Issue_Number (if available)

Please ignored. I guess I am confused.

@chanmmn
Copy link
Author

chanmmn commented Jun 30, 2022

Just ignore my pull request. I bet I was confused.

@BillWagner
Copy link
Member

Thanks for adding the additional comments @chanmmn

I'll close this, as the current article is correct.

@BillWagner BillWagner closed this Jun 30, 2022
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants