logic behind the shortcut operators

hi guys

i know that the shortcut operators are || and && and i know why.
i was wondering about the logic that | and & not are not shortcut operators as well?

(a | b) - when a is true, it doesn't metter what b is and it will always be true.
(a & b) - when a is false, it doesn't metter what b is and it will always be false.

can someone explaine me the logic behind it?
thanks

dror

they're not shortcut operators but mathematical operators.

Well, consider what happens if a nd b are replaced with methods a() and b() (both of which return booleans). If I write

and if a() returns false - well, obviously the value of c will be false, regardless of what b() returns. However - method b() may have a side effect. As a programmer, I may want to ensure that method b() executes, and has its side effect, regardless of the fact that the value of c may not depend on b() at all. Or, maybe I don't want b() to execute unless it really effectus things. Either one of these situations is possible, really, depending on what the programmer is trying to do. So Java offers a choice - if you want short-circuiting, use && and ||; if you don't want short-circuiting, use & and |. In my experience, there's rarely much reason not to use short circuiting - which is why && and || are much more common (in my experience) than & and |. However the latter are still available as an option, for the (relatively rare) cases where this is what the programmer desires.

i know that they are not shortcut operators. but waht is the logic behind it?
the logic behind && being a shortcut operator is, that when given (A && B) and A is false, then doesn't metter what will be B and it will always be false. thats why we don't even evaluate B.

in (A & B), if A is false, it's also doesn't metter what B will be.

what is the logic then not to make it also as a shortcut operator and not to save some operations?

thanks

dror

thanks Jim, i got the logic

i wrote my second comment before i got your explanation.

wish you all a great day
dror

I agree with Jim Yingst ....

See Using the mathematical operator what is the ouput of the program

public class ShortCrkOpr {

boolean a(){
return false;
}

boolean b() throws Exception {
throw new Exception();
}
public static void main(String[] args) {
ShortCrkOpr opr = new ShortCrkOpr();
try {
if(opr.a() & opr.b()){
System.out.println("True");
}else{
System.out.println("False");
}

if(opr.a() && opr.b()){
System.out.println("True");
}else{
System.out.println("False");
}

} catch (Exception e) {
System.out.println("Exception caught!!!");
e.printStackTrace();
}
}
}

output....

Exception caught!!!
java.lang.Exception .......

so the latter effect of the method b()has come...

public class ShortCrkOpr {

boolean a(){
return false;
}

boolean b() throws Exception {
throw new Exception();
}
public static void main(String[] args) {
ShortCrkOpr opr = new ShortCrkOpr();
try {
if(opr.a() && opr.b()){
System.out.println("True");
}else{
System.out.println("False");
}
if(opr.a() & opr.b()){
System.out.println("True");
}else{
System.out.println("False");
}

} catch (Exception e) {
System.out.println("Exception caught!!!");
e.printStackTrace();
}
}
}

output is...

False
Exception caught!!!
java.lang.Exception

here once the method a() has returned false it wouldn't move to the next method b() to check....