Hi Edgar, Hi Marcel,

Pharo team probably wanted to lower the gap with some mainstream languages
and provide same kind of "operators"...
IMO, we don't need two ways to do the same thing, and we should better let
that out of Squeak.
I suggest using an optional package if compatibility matters.

However, note that for VMMaker << and >> are directed shifts and it makes a
big difference.
The code generated for bitShift: has to check the sign of the shift and
that ain't good.

Le sam. 23 mai 2020 à 21:50, Edgar De Cleene <edgardec2005 at gmail.com> a
écrit :

> Of course you right
> But Pharo have this
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On 23 May 2020, at 12:37, Marcel Taeumel <marcel.taeumel at hpi.de> wrote:
>
> 
> Yes, the bit-wise operators from C translate to #bit*: messages in
> Smalltalk.
>
> However, ages ago, someone started to support #>> and #<< on Integer for
> bit shifting. So, it is somewhat inconsistent.
>
> Even though there are & and | in Boolean, most of the time, the code reads
> better with #and: or #or:. It can be challenging already to teach students
> the difference between "expOne or: [expTwo]" and "expOne or: (expTwo)".
> Adding & and | to the mix is not helpful. :-D
>
> Next step would be to support #ifTrue:ifFalse: on Integer? Please, don't.
> :-)
>
> Best,
> Marcel
>
> Am 23.05.2020 14:12:47 schrieb K K Subbu <kksubbu.ml at gmail.com>:
> On 23/05/20 3:18 pm, Edgar De Cleene wrote:
> > Seems
> > Integer>>#|
> >
> > Is not in Squeak 6.0 .
> > Any reason ?
> AFAIK, #| has always been boolean or operator in Smalltalk. The bitwise
> or is #bitOr: as in:
>
> 2r1011 bitOr: 2r101 "15"
>
> HTH .. Subbu
>
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/squeak-dev/attachments/20200523/47ff1655/attachment.html>