Hi All,<div><br></div><div>    I&#39;m being bitten by Slang&#39;s treatment of bitShift: &amp; &gt;&gt;.  In both cases (generateBitShift:on:indent: &amp; generateShiftRight:on:indent:) Slang generates an unsigned shift by explicitly casting the shifted expression to usqInt.  I can understand the benefit of having an unsigned shift.  But there are times when one really needs a signed shift.  Further, the Smalltalk versions of both bitShift: and &gt;&gt; are signed shifts.</div>
<div><br></div><div>Dare I change e.g. generateShiftRight:on:indent: to leave the expression alone and generate either a signed or an unsigned shift based on the variable&#39;s declaration?  Or must I live with a maddening cCode: &#39;(signed)&#39; inSmalltalk: [] carbuncle?</div>
<div><br></div><div>E.</div>