On Mon, 4 Sep 2023 14:33:08 GMT, Jorn Vernee <jver...@openjdk.org> wrote:
>>> I think it's worth it in order to have a cleaner contract for the shift >>> ops, should we want to use them for anything else in the future, but also >>> just to make them easier to understand for future readers. >> >> I agree that having a cleaner contract for the shift binding would prove >> useful in the long run. If we do that, we can also simplify the binding >> itself, as it would no longer need an input type? > >> as it would no longer need an input type? > > Yes. Then both shift ops would always operate on `long`. I've changed it. Note that I need many more conversions because buffer load/store also use subtypes of `int`. Please take a look at my updated version (after commit number 5). ------------- PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/15417#discussion_r1315032737
