yank '>>>'?

[KennyTM~]

On Dec 7, 09 05:02, Don wrote:
> bearophile wrote:
>> Don:
>>
>>> I think DMD should just do what gcc does: recognize that
>>> (x << 32-n | x>>n) is ror n
>>> (x << n | x>> 32-n) is rol n
>>> where x is int. Ugly, but doesn't require an intrinsic.
>>
>> Thanks, but no thanks, it's too much ugly and it gets even more ugly
>> if you need to use that with ulongs or ushorts, etc. It seems Walter
>> doesn't want to remove the unsigned shift, so for the rotations it's
>> much better to add a rol/ror to std.intrinsic (plus something to read
>> the carry bit, etc).
>>
>> Bye,
>> bearophile
>
> The problem is, std.intrinsic is scarcely more portable than inline asm.
> It doesn't even work on LDC!
> You then get problems with user defined types that want to have a rotate.
> BTW, if the above intrinsic existed, you would just define:
>
> T ror(T)(T x, uint n)
> {
> return (x << ((T.sizeof*8)-n) | x>>n);
> }

Shouldn't that be a problem of ldc, the implementation of std.intrinsic, 
or both? The interface of std.intrinsic is perfectly fine.