>>1 + -2 - -3
>>
>>it evaluates to 2
>>
>>it is equivalent to
>>
>>1 - 2 + 3
>
>Ok, now rewrite it as 1 + -1*2 - -1*3 and the result is:

It's also equivalent to

1 + ( 0 - 2 ) - ( 0 - 3 )

but that's pretty much beside the point...

>TaDaaaaa: 2 - same thing. The rules of precedence are preserved.

The first law of mathodynamics is the precedence is always preserved. *lol*

>Now, explain to me this "tightly bound" theory. I don't remember seeing that in any text books or math papers. ;)

That's my own spin on it as an attempt to impress how the sign of the number has precedence over an exponentiation operator.