01 1011 - 11 1101 = ? use 2's complement - binary

I'm trying to figure out this doozie: 01 1011 - 11 1101
use 2's complement to solve, 6bits signed.
This is what I tried:
range of 6bits: -32 to 31
01 1011 = 27
11 1101 = -29
27 -(-29) = 56 (overflow)
11 1101 -- 2s complement --> 10 0011
so
01 1011 + 10 0011 = (missing bit)11 1110 = -2!
Any luck?

Ok so I think I figured it out:
my first mistake was that 11 1101 is not -29 but -3.
SO:
01 1011 = 27
11 1101 = -3
27 -(-3) = 30
I can do a reverse 2's complement of -3 which is:
11 1101 - 1 = 11 1100
then I flip 11 1100 which gives me 00 0011.
so
01 1011 + 00 0011 = 01 1110 = 30
:)

Related

Loop storing 1s complement

Suppose a computer uses 4-bit one’s complement numbers. Ignoring overflows, what value will be stored in the variable j after the following pseudocode routine terminates?
0 → j // Store 0 in j
-3 → k // Store -3 in k
while k ≠ 0
j = j + 1
k = k - 1
end while
'''
I thought the loop would continue forever, but the answer in the back of the book says:
J (Binary) K (Binary)
0 0000 -3 1100
1 0001 -4 1011 (1100 + 1110) (where last carry is added to sum doing 1's complement addition)
2 0010 -5 1010 (1011 + 1110)
3 0011 -6 1001 (1010 + 1110)
4 0100 -7 1000 (1001 + 1110)
5 0101 7 0111 (1000 + 1110) (This is overflow -- but you can ignore)
6 0110 6 0110
7 0111 5 0101
-7 1000 4 0100
-6 1001 3 0011
-5 1010 2 0010
-4 1011 1 0001
-3 1100 0 0000
I do not understand how the k can flip to positives and the j to negatives. I do understand how they got the rows of where j =0,1,2,3,4

How do you compress image data for LZW encoding for .GIF files?

I am having trouble understanding how to compress image data for the 89a specification for .gif files. Say for example I am trying to make a 3x2 .GIF. Let me construct a sample color code table and walk through an example [of what I think is correct].
Color code | Color
------------------
0 | Brown
1 | Red
2 | Green
3 | Black
The image I want to create is this.
3x2 pixels (6 pixels total)
----------
Br Br Br
Br R Br
Compressing with LZW walks me through this process. This is the final code table I get.
Code table
----------
# | code
0 | 0
1 | 1
2 | 2
3 | 3
4 | clear
5 | eoi // end of information
6 | 0 0
7 | 0 0 0
8 | 0 1
9 | 1 0
With an eventual value of 4 0 6 0 1 0 5 that are my codes. Because I wrote out a code 0 0 0, this code value equals 7, so I had to increase my code size from 3 > 4 bits for subsequent codes. So, here are the bytes of my image data (from my code table).
100 - 4
000 - 0
110 - 6
0000 - 0
0001 - 1
0000 - 0
0101 - 5
I end up encoding my image data as
10000100 - 132
00100001 - 33
10100000 - 160
00000000 - 0
Which ends up looking like this in my final .gif file (I've put brackets around the values that correspond to the image data)
47 49 46 38 39 61 03 00 02 00 f1 00 00 b9 7a 56
ff 00 00 00 ff 00 00 00 00 21 ff 0b 4e 45 54 53
43 41 50 45 32 2e 30 03 01 ff ff 00 21 f9 04 04
64 00 00 00 2c 00 00 00 00 03 00 02 00 00 [02 04
84 21 a0 00 00] 3b
// Explanation
02 - Minimum LZW code size
04 - Data sub-block of 4 bytes
84 - 132 in decimal
21 - 33 in decimal
a0 - 160 in decimal
00 - 0 in decimal
00 - Termination byte
My image looks something like this (why is there green in here instead of red?). I blew the image up since 2x3 pixels is a bit hard to read.
Is there something fundamental that I am missing? I appreciate your time to look at this with me.
Found the error, it lies in the code size when compressing LZW image data.
When you are creating the code table when compressing image data with LZW, you need to increment your code size when you've added a code that equals to 2^(code size). So, instead of incrementing the code size by one after adding code 7 | 0 0 0 (as shown in the table above), I needed to instead increment the code size by one after adding 8 | 0 1 (because 8 = 2^(code size == 3)).
This is how the image data changes by incrementing the code size as described
100 - 4
000 - 0
110 - 6
000 - 0
0001 - 1
0000 - 0
0101 - 5
And then, how the resulting image data bytes has changed.
10000100 - 132
00010001 - 17
01010000 - 80
I've put brackets around the data to show a comparison from the full .gif data to show what has changed (after applying the fix). This is the same .gif file from above.
47 49 46 38 39 61 03 00 02 00 f1 00 00 b9 7a 56
ff 00 00 00 ff 00 00 00 00 21 ff 0b 4e 45 54 53
43 41 50 45 32 2e 30 03 01 ff ff 00 21 f9 04 04
64 00 00 00 2c 00 00 00 00 03 00 02 00 00 [02 03
84 11 50 00] 3b
// Explanation
02 - Minimum LZW code size
03 - Data sub-block of 3 bytes
84 - 132 in decimal
11 - 17 in decimal
50 - 80 in decimal
00 - Termination byte

multiple monthly averages for multiple years using sql

I am having a data set in the format which i'm attaching below. It contains data for, say, 25 years on a daily basis. I have to take out averages of each column (AA, BB, CC,DD) omitting null values, for a single / multiple months (not all months together) year wise: like avg of AA for the month of Jan and Jul from 90-95. I'm not able to frame a proper query.
NAME DD MM YYYY TIME AA BB CC DD
DLH 01 01 1986 0000 0
DLH 01 01 1986 0100 0
DLH 01 01 1986 0200 0
DLH 01 01 1986 0230 0 6 5 94
DLH 01 01 1986 0300 0
DLH 01 01 1986 0400 0
DLH 01 01 1986 0500 0
DLH 01 01 1986 0530 0 6 5 94
DLH 01 01 1986 0600 0 6
DLH 01 01 1986 0700 0 6
DLH 01 01 1986 0800 0 8
DLH 01 01 1986 0830 0 9 8 95
DLH 01 01 1986 0900 0 9
DLH 01 01 1986 1000 2 14
DLH 01 01 1986 1100 2 17
DLH 01 01 1986 1115 5
DLH 01 01 1986 1130 7 17 9 60
DLH 01 01 1986 1140 7
DLH 01 01 1986 1145 7
DLH 01 01 1986 1150 7
DLH 01 01 1986 1200 8 18
DLH 01 01 1986 1300 6 18
DLH 01 01 1986 1400 10 18
DLH 01 01 1986 1430 7 18 8 50
Assuming I understand your question properly, I would do the following for the example given:
SELECT AVG(x.AA)
FROM
(SELECT AA
FROM Table1
WHERE MM IN (1,7) AND YYYY BETWEEN 1990 AND 1995) x

Percentage by Row Group

I have a matrix with rows grouped by Dept (Department). I am trying to get the actual hours / required hours percentage in a column for each row group, but I can only get the total %, not the % by group. Ex:
I should get this:
Total Employee Req Hrs Rep Hrs % Billable hrs % NonBill Hrs % Time Off %
Dept A Total 672 680 101 575 85 140 21 8 1
Emp1 168 170 101 150 89 50 29 0 0
Emp2 168 165 98 120 71 20 12 8 4
Emp3 168 175 104 155 92 20 12 0 0
Emp4 168 170 101 150 89 50 29 0 0
Dept B Total 420 428 102 365 87 80 19 4 .1
Emp5 168 170 101 150 89 50 29 0 0
Emp6 84 84 98 60 71 10 12 4 4
Emp7 168 175 104 155 92 20 12 0 0
G Total 1092 1108 101 940 86 190 17 12 1
But I get this:
Total Employee Req Hrs Rep Hrs % Billable hrs % NonBill Hrs % Time Off %
Dept A Total 1684 1675 101 1250 86 225 17 12 1
Emp1 168 170 101 150 89 50 29 0 0
Emp2 168 165 98 120 71 20 12 8 4
Emp3 168 175 104 155 92 20 12 0 0
Emp4 168 170 101 150 89 50 29 0 0
Dept B Total 1092 1108 101 1250 86 225 17 12 1
Emp5 168 170 101 150 89 50 29 0 0
Emp6 84 84 98 60 71 10 12 4 4
Emp7 168 175 104 155 92 20 12 0 0
G Total 1092 1108 101 940 86 190 17 12 1
The totals are correct but the % is wrong.
I have several Datasets because the report only runs the department you are in, except for the VPs who can see all departments.
I Insert the percentage columns into the matrix and have tried several expressions with no results including:
=Fields!ActHrs.Value/Fields!ReqHrs.Value
=Sum(Fields!ActHrs.Value, "Ut_Query")/Sum(Fields!ReqHrs.Value, "Ut_Query")
=Sum(Fields!ActHrs.Value, "Ut_Query","Dept")/Sum(Fields!ReqHrs.Value,
"Ut_Query","Dept")
=Sum(Fields!ActHrs.Value,"Dept", "Ut_Query")/Sum(Fields!ReqHrs.Value,
"Dept","Ut_Query")
Plus more I can't even remember.
I tried creating new groups, and even a new matrix.
There must be a simple way to get the percentage by group but I have not found an answer on any of the interned boards.
OK, I figured this out, but it doesn't make much sense. If I try:
=Textbox29/TextBox28 I get error messages about undefined variables.
If I go the the textbox properties and rename the textboxes to Act and Req and use:
=Act/Req I get the right answer.

Code-golf: Output multiplication table to the Console

Locked. This question and its answers are locked because the question is off-topic but has historical significance. It is not currently accepting new answers or interactions.
I recently pointed a student doing work experience to an article about dumping a multiplication table to the console. It used a nested for loop and multiplied the step value of each.
This looked like a .NET 2.0 approach. I was wondering, with the use of Linq and extension methods,for example, how many lines of code it would take to achieve the same result.
Is the stackoverflow community up to the challenge?
The challenge:
In a console application, write code to generate a table like this example:
01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09
02 04 06 08 10 12 14 16 18
03 06 09 12 15 18 21 24 27
04 08 12 16 20 24 28 32 36
05 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45
06 12 18 24 30 36 42 48 54
07 14 21 28 35 42 49 56 63
08 16 24 32 40 48 56 64 72
09 18 27 36 45 54 63 72 81
As this turned into a language-agnostic code-golf battle, I'll go with the communities decision about which is the best solution for the accepted answer.
There's been alot of talk about the spec and the format that the table should be in, I purposefully added the 00 format but the double new-line was originally only there because I didn't know how to format the text when creating the post!
J - 8 chars - 24 chars for proper format
*/~1+i.9
Gives:
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18
3 6 9 12 15 18 21 24 27
4 8 12 16 20 24 28 32 36
5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45
6 12 18 24 30 36 42 48 54
7 14 21 28 35 42 49 56 63
8 16 24 32 40 48 56 64 72
9 18 27 36 45 54 63 72 81
This solution found by #earl:
'r(0)q( )3.'8!:2*/~1+i.9
Gives:
01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09
02 04 06 08 10 12 14 16 18
03 06 09 12 15 18 21 24 27
04 08 12 16 20 24 28 32 36
05 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45
06 12 18 24 30 36 42 48 54
07 14 21 28 35 42 49 56 63
08 16 24 32 40 48 56 64 72
09 18 27 36 45 54 63 72 81
MATLAB - 10 characters
a=1:9;a'*a
... or 33 characters for stricter output format
a=1:9;disp(num2str(a'*a,'%.2d '))
Brainf**k - 185 chars
>---------[++++++++++>---------[+<[-<+>>+++++++++[->+>>---------[>-<++++++++++<]<[>]>>+<<<<]>[-<+>]<---------<]<[->+<]>>>>++++[-<++++>]<[->++>+++>+++<<<]>>>[.[-]<]<]++++++++++.[-<->]<+]
cat - 252 characters
01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09
02 04 06 08 10 12 14 16 18
03 06 09 12 15 18 21 24 27
04 08 12 16 20 24 28 32 36
05 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45
06 12 18 24 30 36 42 48 54
07 14 21 28 35 42 49 56 63
08 16 24 32 40 48 56 64 72
09 18 27 36 45 54 63 72 81
Assuming that a trailing newline is wanted; otherwise, 251 chars.
* runs *
Python - 61 chars
r=range(1,10)
for y in r:print"%02d "*9%tuple(y*x for x in r)
C#
This is only 2 lines. It uses lambdas not extension methods
var nums = new List<int>() { 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 };
nums.ForEach(n => { nums.ForEach(n2 => Console.Write((n * n2).ToString("00 "))); Console.WriteLine(); });
and of course it could be done in one long unreadable line
new List<int>() { 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 }.ForEach(n => { new List<int>() { 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 }.ForEach(n2 => Console.Write((n * n2).ToString("00 "))); Console.WriteLine(); });
all of this is assuming you consider a labmda one line?
K - 12 characters
Let's take the rosetta-stoning seriously, and compare Kdb+'s K4 with the canonical J solution (*/~1+i.9):
a*/:\:a:1+!9
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18
3 6 9 12 15 18 21 24 27
4 8 12 16 20 24 28 32 36
5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45
6 12 18 24 30 36 42 48 54
7 14 21 28 35 42 49 56 63
8 16 24 32 40 48 56 64 72
9 18 27 36 45 54 63 72 81
J's "table" operator (/) equals the K "each-left each-right" (/:\:) idiom. We don't have J's extremely handy "reflexive" operator (~) in K, so we have to pass a as both left and right argument.
Fortran95 - 40 chars (beating perl by 4 chars!)
This solution does print the leading zeros as per the spec.
print"(9(i3.2))",((i*j,i=1,9),j=1,9);end
Oracle SQL, 103 characters:
select n, n*2, n*3, n*4, n*5, n*6, n*7, n*8, n*9 from (select rownum n from dual CONNECT BY LEVEL < 10)
C# - 117, 113, 99, 96, 95 89 characters
updated based on NickLarsen's idea
for(int x=0,y;++x<10;)
for(y=x;y<x*10;y+=x)
Console.Write(y.ToString(y<x*9?"00 ":"00 \n"));
99, 85, 82 81 characters
... If you don't care about the leading zeros and would allow tabs for alignment.
for(int x=0,y;++x<10;)
{
var w="";
for(y=1;++y<10;)
w+=x*y+" ";
Console.WriteLine(w);
}
COBOL - 218 chars -> 216 chars
PROGRAM-ID.P.DATA DIVISION.WORKING-STORAGE SECTION.
1 I PIC 9.
1 N PIC 99.
PROCEDURE DIVISION.PERFORM 9 TIMES
ADD 1 TO I
SET N TO I
PERFORM 9 TIMES
DISPLAY N' 'NO ADVANCING
ADD I TO N
END-PERFORM
DISPLAY''
END-PERFORM.
Edit
216 chars (probably a different compiler)
PROGRAM-ID.P.DATA DIVISION.WORKING-STORAGE SECTION.
1 I PIC 9.
1 N PIC 99.
PROCEDURE DIVISION.
PERFORM B 9 TIMES
STOP RUN.
B.
ADD 1 TO I
set N to I
PERFORM C 9 TIMES
DISPLAY''.
C.
DISPLAY N" "NO ADVANCING
Add I TO N.
Not really a one-liner, but the shortest linq i can think of:
var r = Enumerable.Range(1, 9);
foreach (var z in r.Select(n => r.Select(m => n * m)).Select(a => a.Select(b => b.ToString("00 "))))
{
foreach (var q in z)
Console.Write(q);
Console.WriteLine();
}
In response to combining this and SRuly's answer
Enumberable.Range(1,9).ToList.ForEach(n => Enumberable.Range(1,9).ToList.ForEach(n2 => Console.Write((n * n2).ToString("00 "))); Console.WriteLine(); });
Ruby - 42 Chars (including one linebreak, interactive command line only)
This method is two lines of input and only works in irb (because irb gives us _), but shortens the previous method by a scant 2 charcters.
1..9
_.map{|y|puts"%02d "*9%_.map{|x|x*y}}
Ruby - 44 Chars (tied with perl)
(a=1..9).map{|y|puts"%02d "*9%a.map{|x|x*y}}
Ruby - 46 Chars
9.times{|y|puts"%02d "*9%(1..9).map{|x|x*y+x}}
Ruby - 47 Chars
And back to a double loop
(1..9).map{|y|puts"%02d "*9%(1..9).map{|x|x*y}}
Ruby - 54 chars!
Using a single loop saves a couple of chars!
(9..89).map{|n|print"%02d "%(n/9*(x=n%9+1))+"\n"*(x/9)}
Ruby - 56 chars
9.times{|x|puts (1..9).map{|y|"%.2d"%(y+x*y)}.join(" ")}
Haskell — 85 84 79 chars
r=[1..9]
s x=['0'|x<=9]++show x
main=mapM putStrLn[unwords[s$x*y|x<-r]|y<-r]
If double spacing is required (89 81 chars),
r=[1..9]
s x=['0'|x<=9]++show x
main=mapM putStrLn['\n':unwords[s$x*y|x<-r]|y<-r]
F# - 61 chars:
for y=1 to 9 do(for x=1 to 9 do printf"%02d "(x*y));printfn""
If you prefer a more applicative/LINQ-y solution, then in 72 chars:
[1..9]|>Seq.iter(fun y->[1..9]|>Seq.iter((*)y>>printf"%02d ");printfn"")
c# - 125, 123 chars (2 lines):
var r=Enumerable.Range(1,9).ToList();
r.ForEach(n=>{var s="";r.ForEach(m=>s+=(n*m).ToString("00 "));Console.WriteLine(s);});
C - 97 79 characters
#define f(i){int i=0;while(i++<9)
main()f(x)f(y)printf("%.2d ",x*y);puts("");}}
Perl, 44 chars
(No hope of coming anywhere near J, but languages with matrix ops are in a class of their own here...)
for$n(1..9){printf"%3d"x9 .$/,map$n*$_,1..9}
R (very similar to Matlab on this level): 12 characters.
> 1:9%*%t(1:9)
[,1] [,2] [,3] [,4] [,5] [,6] [,7] [,8] [,9]
[1,] 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
[2,] 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18
[3,] 3 6 9 12 15 18 21 24 27
[4,] 4 8 12 16 20 24 28 32 36
[5,] 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45
[6,] 6 12 18 24 30 36 42 48 54
[7,] 7 14 21 28 35 42 49 56 63
[8,] 8 16 24 32 40 48 56 64 72
[9,] 9 18 27 36 45 54 63 72 81
PHP, 71 chars
for($x=0;++$x<10;print"\n"){for($y=0;++$y<10;){printf("%02d ",$x*$y);}}
Output:
$ php -r 'for($x=0;++$x<10;print"\n"){for($y=0;++$y<10;){printf("%02d ",$x*$y);}}'
01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09
02 04 06 08 10 12 14 16 18
03 06 09 12 15 18 21 24 27
04 08 12 16 20 24 28 32 36
05 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45
06 12 18 24 30 36 42 48 54
07 14 21 28 35 42 49 56 63
08 16 24 32 40 48 56 64 72
09 18 27 36 45 54 63 72 81
C#, 135 chars, nice and clean:
var rg = Enumerable.Range(1, 9);
foreach (var rc in from r in rg
from c in rg
select (r * c).ToString("D2") + (c == 9 ? "\n\n" : " "))
Console.Write(rc);
PostgreSQL: 81 74 chars
select array(select generate_series(1,9)*x)from generate_series(1,9)as x;
Ruby - 56 chars :D
9.times{|a|9.times{|b|print"%02d "%((a+1)*(b+1))};puts;}
C - 66 Chars
This resolves the complaint about the second parameter of main :)
main(x){for(x=8;x++<89;)printf("%.2d%c",x/9*(x%9+1),x%9<8?32:10);}
C - 77 chars
Based on dreamlax's 97 char answer. His current answer somewhat resembles this one now :)
Compiles ok with gcc, and main(x,y) is fair game for golf i reckon
#define f(i){for(i=0;i++<9;)
main(x,y)f(x)f(y)printf("%.2d ",x*y);puts("");}}
XQuery 1.0 (96 bytes)
string-join(for$x in 1 to 9 return(for$y in 1 to 9 return concat(0[$x*$y<10],$x*$y,' '),'
'),'')
Run (with XQSharp) with:
xquery table.xq !method=text
Scala - 77 59 58 chars
print(1 to 9 map(p=>1 to 9 map(q=>"%02d "format(p*q))mkString)mkString("\n"))
Sorry, I had to do this, the Scala solution by Malax was way too readable...
[Edit] For comprehension seems to be the better choice:
for(p<-1 to 9;q<-{println;1 to 9})print("%02d "format p*q)
[Edit] A much longer solution, but without multiplication, and much more obfuscated:
val s=(1 to 9).toSeq
(s:\s){(p,q)=>println(q.map("%02d "format _)mkString)
q zip(s)map(t=>t._1+t._2)}
PHP, 62 chars
for(;$x++<9;print"\n",$y=0)while($y++<9)printf("%02d ",$x*$y);
Java - 155 137 chars
Update 1: replaced string building by direct printing. Saved 18 chars.
class M{public static void main(String[]a){for(int x,y=0,z=10;++y<z;System.out.println())for(x=0;++x<z;System.out.printf("%02d ",x*y));}}
More readable format:
class M{
public static void main(String[]a){
for(int x,y=0,z=10;++y<z;System.out.println())
for(x=0;++x<z;System.out.printf("%02d ",x*y));
}
}
Another attempt using C#/Linq with GroupJoin:
Console.Write(
String.Join(
Environment.NewLine,
Enumerable.Range(1, 9)
.GroupJoin(Enumerable.Range(1, 9), y => 0, x => 0, (y, xx) => String.Join(" ", xx.Select(x => x * y)))
.ToArray()));
Ruby — 47 chars
puts (a=1..9).map{|i|a.map{|j|"%2d"%(j*i)}*" "}
Output
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18
3 6 9 12 15 18 21 24 27
4 8 12 16 20 24 28 32 36
5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45
6 12 18 24 30 36 42 48 54
7 14 21 28 35 42 49 56 63
8 16 24 32 40 48 56 64 72
9 18 27 36 45 54 63 72 81
(If we ignore spacing, it becomes 39: puts (a=1..9).map{|i|a.map{|j|j*i}*" "} And anyway, I feel like there's a bit of room for improvement with the wordy map stuff.)