On Mon, Apr 22, 2013 at 11:49:20PM +0300, Paul Sokolovsky wrote: > > Defining > > > > (x << n) = (x * 2^(n % 16)) & 0xffff > > > > is just as good a mathematical definition as your desired > > > > (x << n) = (x * 2^n) & 0xffff > > > > (for 16-bit ints) > > > > > > Neither definition is "normal" mathematics. > > Ok, let's recurse into getting terminology and foundation straight. So, > I gather the most correct classification of shift is "arithmetic-logic > bitwise operation". And it's defined in terms of iterative algorithm on > the value represented as a vector of digits. The algorithm is of course > obvious. So, I meant *that* mathematics - which deals with algorithms > and stuff, not one dealt with in primary school. Prooflink that the > former exists: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Algorithm (though nowadays > everyone laughs at wikipedia).
If your perspective happens to be more hardware-oriented than algorithmic, you might think of a barrel shifter as being a good way to define arbitrary bit shift. This results in the behaviour specified by the first definition above. Why should the algorithmic definition be considered more correct than the hardware definition? -- Daniel Beer <dlb...@gmail.com> www.dlbeer.co.nz IRC: inittab (Freenode) PGP key: 2048D/160A553B ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Precog is a next-generation analytics platform capable of advanced analytics on semi-structured data. The platform includes APIs for building apps and a phenomenal toolset for data science. Developers can use our toolset for easy data analysis & visualization. Get a free account! http://www2.precog.com/precogplatform/slashdotnewsletter _______________________________________________ Mspgcc-users mailing list Mspgcc-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mspgcc-users
