[r6rs-discuss] [Formal] Rename bitwise-arithmetic-shift to bitwise-shift etc.

[Ben Harris]

On Fri, 20 Apr 2007, Felix Klock wrote:

> I see how your first paragraph provides evidence for your conclusion  
> with respect to page 42, but page 38 is part of the specification for  
> the (r6rs arithmetic fx) library, where the numbers are specified to  
> have definite length, and therefore a hypothetical fxlogical-shift  
> operation is not meaningless.
> 
> Do you have a separate justification for your suggested changes to  
> page 38?

No.  The renaming of fxarithmetic-shift is for consistency with 
bitwise-arithmetic-shift on the assumption that names in (r6rs arithmetic 
fx) should track names elsewhere in the standard.  I think this is a 
better approach than either allowing the two names to diverge or keeping 
the current unwieldy names.

In particular, I think that fxlogical-shift would be a conceptually 
substantially uglier operation than fxarithmetic-shift, and that it's thus 
perfectly OK for it to have an uglier name.

-- 
Ben Harris