[Gambas-user] strange problem with NOT

[Jean-Francois Perreault]

Rob wrote:

>On Monday 21 March 2005 15:10, Jean-Francois Perreault wrote:
>  
>
>>IF (b <> 0) AND (c > d) THEN
>>then both expression are evaluated before the AND , causing a
>>performance penalty
>>    
>>
>
>Are you sure it has to be that way?  I'm pretty sure Perl's short 
>circuiting, when confronted with
>
>if (($b != 0) && ($c > $d)) {
>
>would evaluate "$b != 0" and then stop if it were false.
>
>Rob
>  
>
I haven't tried , but I'd guess that no , unless it's a hack because () 
has the highest priority , even over + and -

but does gambas implement short circuiting and expression evaluation 
re-ordering optimisations ?