> No, just because the grammar specifies that the "and" binds tighter
> than the prefix mapping. It's exactly analogous to the way that
> arithmetic in nearly all programming languages knows that a+b*c means
> a+(b*c) rather than (a+b)*c -- because "*" binds tighter than "+".
But we don't have operator precedence in cql, it's left-to-right. (And even
if we did, who says "and" takes precedence over a prefix assignment. I don't
mean to be ornery here, but I don't think this is nailed down.)