C++ Binary operators order of precedence

In what order are the following parameters tested (in C++)?

if (a || b && c)
{
}

I've just seen this code in our application and I hate it, I want to add some brackets to just clarify the ordering. But I don't want to add the brackets until I know I'm adding them in the right place.

Edit: Accepted Answer & Follow Up

This link has more information, but it's not totally clear what it means. It seems || and && are the same precedence, and in that case, they are evaluated left-to-right.

http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/126fe14k.aspx

From stackoverflow Mark Ingram

• From here:

  a || (b && c)
  

  This is the default precedence.

  Chris Jester-Young : C++'s precedence is not customisable, hence "default" is redundant.

  ΤΖΩΤΖΙΟΥ : I meant "default" as in "non-parenthesized"
  From ΤΖΩΤΖΙΟΥ

• I'm not sure but it should be easy for you to find out.

  Just create a small program with a statement that prints out the truth value of: (true || false && true)

  If the result is true, then the || has higher precedence than &&, if it is falase, it's the other way around.

  workmad3 : I think you mean (true || false && false) as your current example seems to always be true no matter what the precedence ordering is.
  From Einar

• [http://www.cppreference.com/wiki/operator_precedence] (Found by googling "C++ operator precedence")

  That page tells us that &&, in group 13, has higher precedence than || in group 14, so the expression is equivalent to a || (b && c).

  Unfortunately, the wikipedia article [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operators_in_C_and_C%2B%2B#Operator_precedence] disagrees with this, but since I have the C89 standard on my desk and it agrees with the first site, I'm going to revise the wikipedia article.

  From Rodrigo Queiro

• To answer the follow-up: obviously the table at MSDN is botched, perhaps by somebody unable to do a decent HTML table (or using a Microsoft tool to generate it!).
  I suppose it should look more like the Wikipedia table referenced by Rodrigo, where we have clear sub-sections.
  But clearly the accepted answer is right, somehow we have same priority with && and || than with * and +, for example.
  The snippet you gave is clear and unambiguous for me, but I suppose adding parentheses wouldn't hurt either.

  From PhiLho

• && (boolean AND) has higher precedence than || (boolean OR). Therefore the following are identical:

  a || b && c
  a || (b && c)
  

  A good mnemonic rule is to remember that AND is like multiplication and OR is like addition. If we replace AND with * and OR with +, we get a more familiar equivalent:

  a + b * c
  a + (b * c)
  

  Actually, in Boolean logic, AND and OR act similar to these arithmetic operators:

  a  b   a AND b   a * b   a OR b   a + b
  ---------------------------------------
  0  0      0        0       0        0
  0  1      0        0       1        1
  1  0      0        0       1        1
  1  1      1        1       1        1 (2 really, but we pretend it's 1)
  

  From efotinis