Evaluate the Boolean expression in C++ operator precedence: 3 > 6 && 7 > 4 — is the overall result True or False?

Introduction / Context:
Understanding relational and logical operators in C++ is fundamental to writing correct conditional statements. This item verifies knowledge of how comparison operators interact with the logical AND operator, including precedence and short-circuit evaluation, to determine a final Boolean value.

Given Data / Assumptions:

• The expression is exactly: 3 > 6 && 7 > 4.
• Standard C++ operator precedence applies: relational comparisons are evaluated before logical AND.
• Values are integers, and there is no user-defined operator overload affecting semantics.

Concept / Approach:
Relational operators (such as >) produce Boolean results. The logical AND operator && yields true only if both operands are true. Therefore evaluate each comparison first, then compute the logical AND of the two truth values. Short-circuiting means that if the left operand of && is false, the right operand need not be evaluated to know the overall result; however, here we can still reason about both sides for clarity.

Step-by-Step Solution:
Evaluate 3 > 6, which is false because 3 is not greater than 6.Evaluate 7 > 4, which is true because 7 is greater than 4.Combine with logical AND: false && true is false because both operands must be true for AND to be true.Therefore the entire expression evaluates to false.

Verification / Alternative check:
A quick program printing the result of (3 > 6 && 7 > 4) will show 0 (false) using standard C++ stream formatting. Changing the first comparison to 8 > 6 would yield true && true and produce true, which demonstrates the rule.

Why Other Options Are Wrong:

• True: Incorrect because one operand of the AND is false.
• Not applicable / Cannot be determined / None of the above: The expression is fully determined and evaluates to false.

Common Pitfalls:
Misreading operator precedence or forgetting short-circuiting. Always evaluate comparisons first, then apply logical operators according to precedence and associativity.

Final Answer:
False.