In that case, maybe just call it ROTATE. This would give the maximum flexibility..
x1, x2 .... xn, n, steps, ROTATE where n > 0 0 < abs(steps) < n I'm trying to think of an efficient way to do this that doesn't involve a malloc (it's easy if you can malloc(n*sizeof(double*)) ). Will have a go when I'm in the office tomorrow. However should we keep ROL and ROR as shorthand for the more common 3,1,ROTATE and 3,-1,ROTATE ? Steve Steve Shipway University of Auckland ITS UNIX Systems Design Lead s.ship...@auckland.ac.nz Ph: +64 9 373 7599 ext 86487 ________________________________________ From: Tobias Oetiker [t...@oetiker.ch] Sent: Monday, 28 April 2014 6:30 p.m. To: Steve Shipway Cc: rrd-developers@lists.oetiker.ch Subject: Re: [rrd-developers] ROL and ROR for RPN Hi Steve, your function always affects 3 values ... would there be any gain in makeing this call more generic ? a,b,c,d,x,y,ROL rotate the last x values on the stack by y steps to the left. and maybe have -y role to the right? cheers tobi _______________________________________________ rrd-developers mailing list rrd-developers@lists.oetiker.ch https://lists.oetiker.ch/cgi-bin/listinfo/rrd-developers
