At 12:15 AM 9/11/2001 +0200, Alexander Wirtz wrote:
>Hi Jeroen,
>
>to give a little bit background, as a student of computersciences I happen
>to work with bitshift not as a means of having a "quick" multiplication or
>division, but as using it to "manipulate" bit-patterns.
>The distinction between signed and unsigned rightshift is nothing strange,
>obscure or redundant, but is implemented down to the machine-language
>itsself (dependent on cpu-architecture).
>So this is no "bad operator", but one of the most crucial operators on
>bit-patterns. I don't want to sound arrogant (saying this is almost always a
>sure sign, that it will ;-) ) but maybe you should inform yourself the next
>time why other languages have this operator implemented.
>Disabling signed shifting will force me to turn back to perl, as I use this
>feature for quick hacking certain scripts I use at the University (and that
>would be a very cruel thing to do :o) ) - besides, it would disregard the
>"holy BC"...
In what case (when not dividing) do you use this kind of shift?
Andi
>Cheers & flames on (constructive comments are welcome),
>
>Alexander
>
>--
>| Alexander Wirtz | eMail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] |
>| web@ctive GmbH | "Accidents, Emergency, Ambulance" |
--
PHP Development Mailing List <http://www.php.net/>
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To contact the list administrators, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
