[swift-evolution] [Pitch] Remove bit shift traps

Haravikk swift-evolution at haravikk.me
Fri Mar 18 06:03:30 CDT 2016

Since the trap represents a possible mistake, I think it’s better to keep it. However, we could have &<< and &>> operators that return the suggested defaults? This would also be more explicit that there is extra behaviour on the operation (so it may be a tiny bit slower than << and >>).

> On 18 Mar 2016, at 05:34, Patrick Pijnappel via swift-evolution <swift-evolution at swift.org> wrote:
> Currently, bit shifting with an amount greater than or equal to the size of the type traps:
> func foo(x: Int32) {
>   let y = x << 32 // Runtime trap (for any << or >> with amount >= 32)
> }
> I propose to make this not trap, and just end up with 0 (or ~0 in case of right-shifting a negative number):
> Unlike the traps for integer arithmetic and casts, it is obvious what a bitshift past the end does as fundamentally the behavior stays the same.
> If the intention is to make it analogous with multiplication/division by 2**n, the checks don't really change anything. Right shift are still identical to divisions by 2**n. Left shifts are like multiplication by 2**n but with different overflow behavior, which is already the case with the current rules (e.g. Int.max << 1 doesn't trap)
> It could lead to bugs where users expect this to work, e.g. the following crashes when the entire buffer is consumed: buffer = buffer << bitsConsumed
> Bitshift are often used in performance-sensitive code, and with the current behavior any non-constant bit shift introduces a branch.
> _______________________________________________
> swift-evolution mailing list
> swift-evolution at swift.org
> https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.swift.org/pipermail/swift-evolution/attachments/20160318/213b5d32/attachment.html>

More information about the swift-evolution mailing list