yank '>>>'?

[Jerry Quinn]

Walter Bright Wrote:

> dsimcha wrote:
> > == Quote from KennyTM~ (kennytm at gmail.com)'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