You're right of course, I just mean that it makes it a bit verbose and error-prone to write in full "(i >> (32 - shift)) | (i << shift))". I need to triple chec

You're right of course, I just mean that it makes it a bit verbose and error-prone to write in full "(i >> (32 - shift)) | (i << shift))". I need to triple check that I'm not off-by-one and that all the operators are in the right direction every time I write this. If you had rotation operators like, say, "<|" you could write "i <| shift" instead and that'd be a lot nicer to read and write IMO.