On Dec 7, 09 09:11, Jerry Quinn wrote:
Walter Bright Wrote:
dsimcha wrote:
== Quote from KennyTM~ ([email protected])'s article
No, it will _silently_ break code that uses>>> as unsigned right shift.
Well, we could get around this by making>>> an error for a few releases, and
then
only after everyone's removed their>>>s that mean unsigned shift, we could drop
in the rotate semantics.
It'll still silently break code moving from D1 to D2.
Well, I could see the value of poviding a rotate operator.
Since>>> is tainted, what about>>@ and<<@ for integral rotation?
Jerry
Why these must be implemented through additional operators?
