This is a misspelling of the intended !(x & A) negated bit test that happens in practice every now and then.
I ran this on Chromium and all its dependencies, and it fired 0 times -- no false or true positives, but it would've caught a bug in an in-progress change that had to be caught by a Visual Studio warning instead.
And this is the reason you had to put a "not" on the second run line, right?