Signed word lengths and indexes

[BCS]

Hello Don,

> Simen kjaeraas wrote:
> 
>> BCS <none at anon.com> wrote:
>> 
>>> I still haven't seen anyone address how typeof(a>>>b) == typeof(a)
>>> breaks c code when a>>>b isn't legal c to begin with.
>>> 
>> It doesn't, of course. However, it is desirable to have similar rules
>> for similar operations, like >> and >>>.
>> 
> Which is why I said that it doesn't seem possible to make >>> work,
> without making a special-case rule for it.

At least for me, I find the current situation more surprising than the alternative. 
For that matter if >>> worked different than >>, If that were the case, I 
think I would have (the first time I ran across it) thought the >> case was 
the odd one.

-- 
... <IXOYE><