Re: bit.lshift and performance - luabitop v.s. lua-5.2.0-work4

[Mike Pall <mikelu-1010@...>]

Miles Bader wrote:
>   bit.lshift (NUM, bit.band (COUNT, 31))
> 
> [instead of plain "bit.lshift (NUM, COUNT)"]

Oh, sure. ;-) Because absolutely everyone is just waiting to
rewrite all of their code with that bloat. Not gonna happen.

Anyway, this is going nowhere. The "bit.*" namespace, as defined
by lbitlib and the upwards-compatible Lua BitOp, already has a
large, existing user base and code base, built over several years.
Anyone insisting on creating an incompatible library ought to pick
a different namespace.

--Mike