Remove redundancy in docstrings for >> and >>>

[udohjeremiah]

The << operator says this and its clearly understandable:

help?> <<

  <<(x, n)

  Left bit shift operator, x << n. For n >= 0, the result is x shifted left
  by n bits, filling with 0s. This is equivalent to x * 2^n. For n < 0,
  this is equivalent to x >> -n.

But then the >> and >>> operator both use the word where n >= 0, even after stating For n >= 0 in the beginning:

help?> >>

  >>(x, n)

  Right bit shift operator, x >> n. For n >= 0, the result is x shifted
  right by n bits, where n >= 0, filling with 0s if x >= 0, 1s if x < 0,
  preserving the sign of x. This is equivalent to fld(x, 2^n). For n < 0,
  this is equivalent to x << -n.

help?> >>>

  >>>(x, n)

  Unsigned right bit shift operator, x >>> n. For n >= 0, the result is x
  shifted right by n bits, where n >= 0, filling with 0s. For n < 0, this
  is equivalent to x << -n.

The << does not have this where n >= 0 confusion, so I don't know why it's coming into >> and >>> even after stating For n >= 0 in the beginning of the statement.

The For n >= 0 already states what's happening, so the where n >= 0 complicates things, and gets one confused, which I think was a typo error.

[LilithHafner]

Agreed. This is a clear case of redundancy.