Re: class formats

Hi Andreas,

On 5/16/06, Andreas Raab <andreas.raab@...> wrote:
>  > Can anyone confirm this? Or am I wrong?
>
> That is exactly correct. It's a little implementation trick so that the
> format doesn't have to be "normalized" for allocation. It originates
> from the days when even a shift was too slow in allocation; personally I
> find it a little awkward.

thanks for your answer.

Would a reimplementation in a different way significantly speed things
up, or is that just aesthetically unsatisfying? (I suspect shifts are
faster now.)

Best,

Michael