I was reading Joel's book where he was suggesting as interview question:
Write a program to reverse the "ON" bits in a given byte.
I only can think of a solution using C.
Asking here so you can show me how to do in a Non C way (if possible)
I claim trick question. :) Reversing all bits means a flip-flop, but only the bits that are on clearly means:
return 0;
What specifically does that question mean?
Good question. If reversing the "ON" bits means reversing only the bits that are "ON", then you will always get 0, no matter what the input is. If it means reversing all the bits, i.e. changing all 1s to 0s and all 0s to 1s, which is how I initially read it, then that's just a bitwise NOT, or complement. C-based languages have a complement operator, ~, that does this. For example:
unsigned char b = 102; /* 0x66, 01100110 */
unsigned char reverse = ~b; /* 0x99, 10011001 */
What specifically does that question mean?
Does reverse mean setting 1's to 0's and vice versa?
Or does it mean 00001100 --> 00110000 where you reverse their order in the byte? Or perhaps just reversing the part that is from the first 1 to the last 1? ie. 00110101 --> 00101011?
Assuming it means reversing the bit order in the whole byte, here's an x86 assembler version:
; al is input register
; bl is output register
xor bl, bl ; clear output
; first bit
rcl al, 1 ; rotate al through carry
rcr bl, 1 ; rotate carry into bl
; duplicate above 2-line statements 7 more times for the other bits
not the most optimal solution, a table lookup is faster.
Reversing the order of bits in C#:
byte ReverseByte(byte b)
{
byte r = 0;
for(int i=0; i<8; i++)
{
int mask = 1 << i;
int bit = (b & mask) >> i;
int reversedMask = bit << (7 - i);
r |= (byte)reversedMask;
}
return r;
}
I'm sure there are more clever ways of doing it but in that precise case, the interview question is meant to determine if you know bitwise operations so I guess this solution would work.
In an interview, the interviewer usually wants to know how you find a solution, what are you problem solving skills, if it's clean or if it's a hack. So don't come up with too much of a clever solution because that will probably mean you found it somewhere on the Internet beforehand. Don't try to fake that you don't know it neither and that you just come up with the answer because you are a genius, this is will be even worst if she figures out since you are basically lying.
If you're talking about switching 1's to 0's and 0's to 1's, using Ruby:
n = 0b11001100
~n
If you mean reverse the order:
n = 0b11001100
eval("0b" + n.to_s(2).reverse)
If you mean counting the on bits, as mentioned by another user:
n = 123
count = 0
0.upto(8) { |i| count = count + n[i] }
♥ Ruby
I'm probably misremembering, but I
thought that Joel's question was about
counting the "on" bits rather than
reversing them.
Here you go:
#include <stdio.h>
int countBits(unsigned char byte);
int main(){
FILE* out = fopen( "bitcount.c" ,"w");
int i;
fprintf(out, "#include <stdio.h>\n#include <stdlib.h>\n#include <time.h>\n\n");
fprintf(out, "int bitcount[256] = {");
for(i=0;i<256;i++){
fprintf(out, "%i", countBits((unsigned char)i));
if( i < 255 ) fprintf(out, ", ");
}
fprintf(out, "};\n\n");
fprintf(out, "int main(){\n");
fprintf(out, "srand ( time(NULL) );\n");
fprintf(out, "\tint num = rand() %% 256;\n");
fprintf(out, "\tprintf(\"The byte %%i has %%i bits set to ON.\\n\", num, bitcount[num]);\n");
fprintf(out, "\treturn 0;\n");
fprintf(out, "}\n");
fclose(out);
return 0;
}
int countBits(unsigned char byte){
unsigned char mask = 1;
int count = 0;
while(mask){
if( mask&byte ) count++;
mask <<= 1;
}
return count;
}
The classic Bit Hacks page has several (really very clever) ways to do this, but it's all in C. Any language derived from C syntax (notably Java) will likely have similar methods. I'm sure we'll get some Haskell versions in this thread ;)
byte ReverseByte(byte b)
{
return b ^ 0xff;
}
That works if ^ is XOR in your language, but not if it's AND, which it often is.
And here's a version directly cut and pasted from OpenJDK, which is interesting because it involves no loop. On the other hand, unlike the Scheme version I posted, this version only works for 32-bit and 64-bit numbers. :-)
32-bit version:
public static int reverse(int i) {
// HD, Figure 7-1
i = (i & 0x55555555) << 1 | (i >>> 1) & 0x55555555;
i = (i & 0x33333333) << 2 | (i >>> 2) & 0x33333333;
i = (i & 0x0f0f0f0f) << 4 | (i >>> 4) & 0x0f0f0f0f;
i = (i << 24) | ((i & 0xff00) << 8) |
((i >>> 8) & 0xff00) | (i >>> 24);
return i;
}
64-bit version:
public static long reverse(long i) {
// HD, Figure 7-1
i = (i & 0x5555555555555555L) << 1 | (i >>> 1) & 0x5555555555555555L;
i = (i & 0x3333333333333333L) << 2 | (i >>> 2) & 0x3333333333333333L;
i = (i & 0x0f0f0f0f0f0f0f0fL) << 4 | (i >>> 4) & 0x0f0f0f0f0f0f0f0fL;
i = (i & 0x00ff00ff00ff00ffL) << 8 | (i >>> 8) & 0x00ff00ff00ff00ffL;
i = (i << 48) | ((i & 0xffff0000L) << 16) |
((i >>> 16) & 0xffff0000L) | (i >>> 48);
return i;
}
pseudo code..
while (Read())
Write(0);
I'm probably misremembering, but I thought that Joel's question was about counting the "on" bits rather than reversing them.
Here's the obligatory Haskell soln for complementing the bits, it uses the library function, complement:
import Data.Bits
import Data.Int
i = 123::Int
i32 = 123::Int32
i64 = 123::Int64
var2 = 123::Integer
test1 = sho i
test2 = sho i32
test3 = sho i64
test4 = sho var2 -- Exception
sho i = putStrLn $ showBits i ++ "\n" ++ (showBits $complement i)
showBits v = concatMap f (showBits2 v) where
f False = "0"
f True = "1"
showBits2 v = map (testBit v) [0..(bitSize v - 1)]
If the question means to flip all the bits, and you aren't allowed to use C-like operators such as XOR and NOT, then this will work:
bFlipped = -1 - bInput;
I'd modify palmsey's second example, eliminating a bug and eliminating the eval:
n = 0b11001100
n.to_s(2).rjust(8, '0').reverse.to_i(2)
The rjust is important if the number to be bitwise-reversed is a fixed-length bit field -- without it, the reverse of 0b00101010 would be 0b10101 rather than the correct 0b01010100. (Obviously, the 8 should be replaced with the length in question.) I just got tripped up by this one.
Asking here so you can show me how to do in a Non C way (if possible)
Say you have the number 10101010. To change 1s to 0s (and vice versa) you just use XOR:
10101010
^11111111
--------
01010101
Doing it by hand is about as "Non C" as you'll get.
However from the wording of the question it really sounds like it's only turning off "ON" bits... In which case the answer is zero (as has already been mentioned) (unless of course the question is actually asking to swap the order of the bits).
Since the question asked for a non-C way, here's a Scheme implementation, cheerfully plagiarised from SLIB:
(define (bit-reverse k n)
(do ((m (if (negative? n) (lognot n) n) (arithmetic-shift m -1))
(k (+ -1 k) (+ -1 k))
(rvs 0 (logior (arithmetic-shift rvs 1) (logand 1 m))))
((negative? k) (if (negative? n) (lognot rvs) rvs))))
(define (reverse-bit-field n start end)
(define width (- end start))
(let ((mask (lognot (ash -1 width))))
(define zn (logand mask (arithmetic-shift n (- start))))
(logior (arithmetic-shift (bit-reverse width zn) start)
(logand (lognot (ash mask start)) n))))
Rewritten as C (for people unfamiliar with Scheme), it'd look something like this (with the understanding that in Scheme, numbers can be arbitrarily big):
int
bit_reverse(int k, int n)
{
int m = n < 0 ? ~n : n;
int rvs = 0;
while (--k >= 0) {
rvs = (rvs << 1) | (m & 1);
m >>= 1;
}
return n < 0 ? ~rvs : rvs;
}
int
reverse_bit_field(int n, int start, int end)
{
int width = end - start;
int mask = ~(-1 << width);
int zn = mask & (n >> start);
return (bit_reverse(width, zn) << start) | (~(mask << start) & n);
}
Reversing the bits.
For example we have a number represented by 01101011 . Now if we reverse the bits then this number will become 11010110. Now to achieve this you should first know how to do swap two bits in a number.
Swapping two bits in a number:-
XOR both the bits with one and see if results are different. If they are not then both the bits are same otherwise XOR both the bits with XOR and save it in its original number;
Now for reversing the number
FOR I less than Numberofbits/2
swap(Number,I,NumberOfBits-1-I);
Related
I have a system of n equations and n unknown variables under symbol sum. I want to create a loop to solve this system of equations when inputting n.
y := s -> 1/6cos(3s);
A := (k, s) -> piecewise(k <> 0, 1/2exp(ksI)/abs(k), k = 0, ln(2)exp(s0I) - sin(s));
s := (j, n) -> 2jPi/(2*n + 1);
n := 1;
for j from -n to n do
eqn[j] := sum((A(k, s(j, n))) . (a[k]), k = -n .. n) = y(s(j, n));
end do;
eqs := seq(eqn[i], i = -n .. n);
solve({eqs}, {a[i]});
enter image description here
Please help me out!
I added some missing multiplication symbols to your plaintext code, to reproduce it.
restart;
y:=s->1/6*cos(3*s):
A:=(k,s)->piecewise(k<>0,1/2*exp(k*s*I)/abs(k),
k=0,ln(2)*exp(s*I*0)-sin(s)):
s:=(j,n)->2*j*Pi/(2*n+1):
n:=1:
for j from -n to n do
eqn[j]:=add((A(k,s(j,n)))*a[k],k=-n..n)=y(s(j,n));
end do:
eqs:=seq(eqn[i],i=-n..n);
(-1/4+1/4*I*3^(1/2))*a[-1]+(ln(2)+1/2*3^(1/2))*a[0]+(-1/4-1/4*I*3^(1/2))*a[1] = 1/6,
1/2*a[-1]+ln(2)*a[0]+1/2*a[1] = 1/6,
(-1/4-1/4*I*3^(1/2))*a[-1]+(ln(2)-1/2*3^(1/2))*a[0]+(-1/4+1/4*I*3^(1/2))*a[1] = 1/6
You can pass the set of names (for which to solve) as an optional argument. But that has to contain the actual names, and not just the abstract placeholder a[i] as you tried it.
solve({eqs},{seq(a[i],i=-n..n)});
{a[-1] = 1/6*I/ln(2),
a[0] = 1/6/ln(2),
a[1] = -1/6*I/ln(2)}
You could also omit the indeterminate names here, as optional argument to solve (since you wish to solve for all of them, and no other names are present).
solve({eqs});
{a[-1] = 1/6*I/ln(2),
a[0] = 1/6/ln(2),
a[1] = -1/6*I/ln(2)}
For n:=3 and n:=4 it helps solve to get a result quicker here if exp calls are turned into trig calls. Ie,
solve(evalc({eqs}),{seq(a[i],i=-n..n)});
If n is higher than 4 you might have to wait long for an exact (symbolic) result. But even at n:=10 a floating-point result was fast for me. That is, calling fsolve instead of solve.
fsolve({eqs},{seq(a[i],i=-n..n)});
But even that might be unnecessary, as it seems that the following is a solution for n>=3. Here all the variables are set to zero, except a[-3] and a[3] which are both set to 1/2.
cand:={seq(a[i]=0,i=-n..-4),seq(a[i]=0,i=-2..2),
seq(a[i]=0,i=4..n),seq(a[i]=1/2,i=[-3,3])}:
simplify(eval((rhs-lhs)~({eqs}),cand));
{0}
Suppose I have a 32 or 64 bit unsigned integer.
What is the fastest way to find the index i of the leftmost bit such that the number of 0s in the leftmost i bits equals the number of 1s in the leftmost i bits?
I was thinking of some bit tricks like the ones mentioned here.
I am interested in recent x86_64 processor. This might be relevant as some processor support instructions as POPCNT (count the number of 1s) or LZCNT (counts the number of leading 0s).
If it helps, it is possible to assume that the first bit has always a certain value.
Example (with 16 bits):
If the integer is
1110010100110110b
^
i
then i=10 and it corresponds to the marked position.
A possible (slow) implementation for 16-bit integers could be:
mask = 1000000000000000b
pos = 0
count=0
do {
if(x & mask)
count++;
else
count--;
pos++;
x<<=1;
} while(count)
return pos;
Edit: fixed bug in code as per #njuffa comment.
I don't have any bit tricks for this, but I do have a SIMD trick.
First a few observations,
Interpreting 0 as -1, this problem becomes "find the first i so that the first i bits sum to 0".
0 is even but all the bits have odd values under this interpretation, which gives the insight that i must be even and this problem can be analyzed by blocks of 2 bits.
01 and 10 don't change the balance.
After spreading the groups of 2 out to bytes (none of the following is tested),
// optionally use AVX2 _mm_srlv_epi32 instead of ugly variable set
__m128i spread = _mm_shuffle_epi8(_mm_setr_epi32(x, x >> 2, x >> 4, x >> 6),
_mm_setr_epi8(0, 4, 8, 12, 1, 5, 9, 13, 2, 6, 10, 14, 3, 7, 11, 15));
spread = _mm_and_si128(spread, _mm_set1_epi8(3));
Replace 00 by -1, 11 by 1, and 01 and 10 by 0:
__m128i r = _mm_shuffle_epi8(_mm_setr_epi8(-1, 0, 0, 1, 0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0),
spread);
Calculate the prefix sum:
__m128i pfs = _mm_add_epi8(r, _mm_bsrli_si128(r, 1));
pfs = _mm_add_epi8(pfs, _mm_bsrli_si128(pfs, 2));
pfs = _mm_add_epi8(pfs, _mm_bsrli_si128(pfs, 4));
pfs = _mm_add_epi8(pfs, _mm_bsrli_si128(pfs, 8));
Find the highest 0:
__m128i iszero = _mm_cmpeq_epi8(pfs, _mm_setzero_si128());
return __builtin_clz(_mm_movemask_epi8(iszero) << 15) * 2;
The << 15 and *2 appear because the resulting mask is 16 bits but the clz is 32 bit, it's shifted one less because if the top byte is zero that indicates that 1 group of 2 is taken, not zero.
This is a solution for 32-bit data using classical bit-twiddling techniques. The intermediate computation requires 64-bit arithmetic and logic operations. I have to tried to stick to portable operations as far as it was possible. Required is an implementation of the POSIX function ffsll to find the least-significant 1-bit in a 64-bit long long, and a custom function rev_bit_duos that reverses the bit-duos in a 32-bit integer. The latter could be replaced with a platform-specific bit-reversal intrinsic, such as the __rbit intrinsic on ARM platforms.
The basic observation is that if a bit-group with an equal number of 0-bits and 1-bits can be extracted, it must contain an even number of bits. This means we can examine the operand in 2-bit groups. We can further restrict ourselves to tracking whether each 2-bit increases (0b11), decreases (0b00) or leaves unchanged (0b01, 0b10) a running balance of bits. If we count positive and negative changes with separate counters, 4-bit counters will suffice unless the input is 0 or 0xffffffff, which can be handled separately. Based on comments to the question, these cases shouldn't occur. By subtracting the negative change count from the positive change count for each 2-bit group we can find at which group the balance becomes zero. There may be multiple such bit groups, we need to find the first one.
The processing can be parallelized by expanding each 2-bit group into a nibble that then can serve as a change counter. The prefix sum can be computed via integer multiply with an appropriate constant, which provides the necessary shift & add operations at each nibble position. Efficient ways for parallel nibble-wise subtraction are well-known, likewise there is a well-known technique due to Alan Mycroft for detecting zero-bytes that is trivially changeable to zero-nibble detection. POSIX function ffsll is then applied to find the bit position of that nibble.
Slightly problematic is the requirement for extraction of a left-most bit group, rather than a right-most, since Alan Mycroft's trick only works for finding the first zero-nibble from the right. Also, handling the prefix-sum for left-most bit group require use of a mulhi operation which may not be easily available, and may be less efficient than standard integer multiplication. I have addressed both of these issues by simply bit-reversing the original operand up front.
#include <stdio.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
#include <stdint.h>
#include <string.h>
/* Reverse bit-duos using classic binary partitioning algorithm */
inline uint32_t rev_bit_duos (uint32_t a)
{
uint32_t m;
a = (a >> 16) | (a << 16); // swap halfwords
m = 0x00ff00ff; a = ((a >> 8) & m) | ((a << 8) & ~m); // swap bytes
m = (m << 4)^m; a = ((a >> 4) & m) | ((a << 4) & ~m); // swap nibbles
m = (m << 2)^m; a = ((a >> 2) & m) | ((a << 2) & ~m); // swap bit-duos
return a;
}
/* Return the number of most significant (leftmost) bits that must be extracted
to achieve an equal count of 1-bits and 0-bits in the extracted bit group.
Return 0 if no such bit group exists.
*/
int solution (uint32_t x)
{
const uint64_t mask16 = 0x0000ffff0000ffffULL; // alternate half-words
const uint64_t mask8 = 0x00ff00ff00ff00ffULL; // alternate bytes
const uint64_t mask4h = 0x0c0c0c0c0c0c0c0cULL; // alternate nibbles, high bit-duo
const uint64_t mask4l = 0x0303030303030303ULL; // alternate nibbles, low bit-duo
const uint64_t nibble_lsb = 0x1111111111111111ULL;
const uint64_t nibble_msb = 0x8888888888888888ULL;
uint64_t a, b, r, s, t, expx, pc_expx, nc_expx;
int res;
/* common path can't handle all 0s and all 1s due to counter overflow */
if ((x == 0) || (x == ~0)) return 0;
/* make zero-nibble detection work, and simplify prefix sum computation */
x = rev_bit_duos (x); // reverse bit-duos
/* expand each bit-duo into a nibble */
expx = x;
expx = ((expx << 16) | expx) & mask16;
expx = ((expx << 8) | expx) & mask8;
expx = ((expx << 4) | expx);
expx = ((expx & mask4h) * 4) + (expx & mask4l);
/* compute positive and negative change counts for each nibble */
pc_expx = expx & ( expx >> 1) & nibble_lsb;
nc_expx = ~expx & (~expx >> 1) & nibble_lsb;
/* produce prefix sums for positive and negative change counters */
a = pc_expx * nibble_lsb;
b = nc_expx * nibble_lsb;
/* subtract positive and negative prefix sums, nibble-wise */
s = a ^ ~b;
r = a | nibble_msb;
t = b & ~nibble_msb;
s = s & nibble_msb;
r = r - t;
r = r ^ s;
/* find first nibble that is zero using Alan Mycroft's magic */
r = (r - nibble_lsb) & (~r & nibble_msb);
res = ffsll (r) / 2; // account for bit-duo to nibble expansion
return res;
}
/* Return the number of most significant (leftmost) bits that must be extracted
to achieve an equal count of 1-bits and 0-bits in the extracted bit group.
Return 0 if no such bit group exists.
*/
int reference (uint32_t x)
{
int count = 0;
int bits = 0;
uint32_t mask = 0x80000000;
do {
bits++;
if (x & mask) {
count++;
} else {
count--;
}
x = x << 1;
} while ((count) && (bits <= (int)(sizeof(x) * CHAR_BIT)));
return (count) ? 0 : bits;
}
int main (void)
{
uint32_t x = 0;
do {
uint32_t ref = reference (x);
uint32_t res = solution (x);
if (res != ref) {
printf ("x=%08x res=%u ref=%u\n\n", x, res, ref);
}
x++;
} while (x);
return EXIT_SUCCESS;
}
A possible solution (for 32-bit integers). I'm not sure if it can be improved / avoid the use of lookup tables. Here x is the input integer.
//Look-up table of 2^16 elements.
//The y-th is associated with the first 2 bytes y of x.
//If the wanted bit is in y, LUT1[y] is minus the position of the bit
//If the wanted bit is not in y, LUT1[y] is the number of ones in excess in y minus 1 (between 0 and 15)
LUT1 = ....
//Look-up talbe of 16 * 2^16 elements.
//The y-th element is associated to two integers y' and y'' of 4 and 16 bits, respectively.
//y' is the number of excess ones in the first byte of x, minus 1
//y'' is the second byte of x. The table contains the answer to return.
LUT2 = ....
if(LUT1[x>>16] < 0)
return -LUT1[x>>16];
return LUT2[ (LUT1[x>>16]<<16) | (x & 0xFFFF) ]
This requires ~1MB for the lookup tables.
The same idea also works using 4 lookup tables (one per byte of x). The requires more operations but brings down the memory to 12KB.
LUT1 = ... //2^8 elements
LUT2 = ... //8 * 2^8 elements
LUT3 = ... //16 * 2^8 elements
LUT3 = ... //24 * 2^8 elements
y = x>>24
if(LUT1[y] < 0)
return -LUT1[y];
y = (LUT1[y]<<8) | ((x>>16) & 0xFF);
if(LUT2[y] < 0)
return -LUT2[y];
y = (LUT2[y]<<8) | ((x>>8) & 0xFF);
if(LUT3[y] < 0)
return -LUT3[y];
return LUT4[(LUT2[y]<<8) | (x & 0xFF) ];
I need to write in simple assembly language (not assembly syntax) a program that calculates the division of two binary numbers of 16 bits without a reminder in O(logn), and I wondered if there is an efficient algorithm to do it.
If found some algorithms on the web, but all of them are looking for access to specific bit in the number, and I can't do it..
The only arithmetic operations I have are +, -, shift right/left but only ones each operation, &, |, ! and thats all apparently..
Thanks,
Eliav
this should work.
does it help you?
C-Style:
c=1;
// find the maximum n for b*2^n <= a
// c=2^n
while((b << 1) <= a) {
b = b << 1;
c = c << 1;
}
while (c > 0) {
if (a - b >= 0) {
a -= b;
result += c;
}
c = c >> 1;
b = b >> 1;
}
Assembly-Style:
registers s0,s1,s2,s3, zero
syntax <instr.> <dest>,<src>,<arg>
%result: s0
%a: s1
%b: s2
%c: s3
add, s3, zero, 1
loop_1_start:
left_shift s4,s2,1
jump_if_greater s4,s1,loop_1_end
left_shift s2,s2,1
left_shift s3,s3,1
jump loop_1_start
loop_1_end:
loop_2_start:
jump_if_greate_or_equal s3,zero,loop_2_end
if_start:
sub s4,s1,s2
jump_if_smaller s4, zero, if_end
sub s1,s1,s2
add s0,s0,s3
if_end:
right_shift s2,s2,1
right_shift s3,s3,1
jump loop_2_start
loop_2_end:
Is there an elegant way of moving a bit within a byte (or word/long). For simplicity, lets use a simple 8-bit byte and just one bit to move within the byte.
Given a bit number, based on 0-7 Least-sig-bit to most-sig-bit, (or bits 1-8 if you'd rather), I would like to move a bit from one position to another:
7654 3210 <bit position
0101 1010 <some binary value
--x- --y- <move bit from x to y
0111 0100 <new value with x moved to y and intervening bits shifted left
So, x at bit position 5 moves to y at bit position 1, bits 0,6,7 stay unchanged. Bits 2,3,4 are shifted left to 'make room' for the bit moved from 5 to 2. This is just an example.
It is important that the bit moves, not swapped with its target. There are numerous exampls of bits that swap, but that is quite trivial.
The solution ideally would use simple bit-twiddling and bitwise operators. Assume language agnostic, bit simple AND/OR/XOR, NOT, SHIFT Left/Right / ROTATE or similar instructions would be fine in any combination, plus any other basic arithmetic operator, eg: mod, addition/subtraction etc. Even working psuedo-code would be ok. Alternatively, a bit array or bitfield type structure would probably be straightforward.
In addition to the actual bit move, I would like to find a way to :
Move any bit up or down.
Specify the bit number source/destination in any convenient format: eg: 6>2
implies shift down, 3>7 shift up or start-bit +/- offset: 6-4 or 3+4, or bit weighted: bit 6=64 to bit 3=8.
Possibly extendable from byte to unsigned int, long, etc.
(Ideally, be extendable
to more than one bit at a time, probably adjacent bits if easier)
Performance is not a major issue, but something elegant is likley to be plenty fast enough.
My own niaive approach would be to identify the source and target bit positions, decide if shift up or down, take a shifted copy, mask off the static bits and find the source bit, merge the static and shifted bits and somehow set/clear the target bit. However, while the theory seems good, an elegant implementation is beyond me.
I realise that a precompiled lookup table could be built for a byte, but if this is to be extended to integers/longs, this would be impractical for me.
Any help appreciated. Thanks in advance.
First, an observation about the original problem, and the subsequent extensions that you mention:
The "moving a bit" operation that you describe is really a rotation of a contiguous range of bits. In your example, you are rotating bits 1-5 inclusive, by one bit to the left:
7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0
+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+ +---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+
| 0 | 1 | 0<--1<--1<--0<--1 | 0 | -> | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
+---+---+-|-+---+---+---+-^-+---+ +---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+
| |
+---------------+
If you consider a more general form of this operation to be "rotate a range of bits left by some amount" with three parameters:
the least significant bit to include in the rotation
the most significant bit to include in the rotation
the number of bits to rotate by
then it becomes a single basic primitive which can perform all of the things you want to do:
you can obviously move any bit (choose appropriate least/most significant bit paramaters);
you can rotate left or right, because if you are rotating a range of n bits, then a rotation right by k bits is the same thing as a rotation left by n - k bits;
it trivially generalises to any bit width;
by definition we can rotate more by more than one bit at a time.
So now, all that's needed is to construct this primitive...
To start with, we're almost certainly going to need a bit mask for the bits we care about.
We can form a mask for bits 0 - n by shifting a 1 by n + 1 bits to the left, then subtracting 1. e.g. a mask for bits 0-5 would be (in binary):
00111111
...which can be formed by taking a 1:
00000001
...shifting 5+1 = 6 bits to the left:
01000000
...and subtracting 1 to give:
00111111
In C, this would be (1 << (bit + 1)) - 1. But there is a subtlety here, for C at least (and I apologise for the digression when you've tagged this as language-agnostic, but this is important, and there are probably similar issues in other languages too): a shift by the width of your type (or more) leads to undefined behaviour. So if we were trying to construct a mask for bits 0-7 for an 8-bit type, the calculation would be (1 << 8) - 1, which would be undefined. (It might work on some systems and some compilers, but wouldn't be portable.) There are also undefined behaviour issues with signed types in the case where you would end up shifting into the sign bit.
Fortunately, in C, we can avoid these problems by using an unsigned type, and writing the expression as (1 << bit) + (1 << bit) - 1. Arithmetic with unsigned n-bit values is defined by the standard to be reduced modulo 2n, and all of the individual operations are well-defined, so we're guaranteed to get the right answer.
(End of digression.)
OK, so now we have a mask for bits 0 - msb. We want to make a mask for bits lsb - msb, which we can do by subtracting the mask for bits 0 - (lsb-1), which is (1 << lsb) - 1. e.g.
00111111 mask for bits 0-5: (1 << 5) + (1 << 5) - 1
- 00000001 mask for bits 0-0: (1 << 1) - 1
-------- -------------------------------
00111110 mask for bits 1-5: (1 << 5) + (1 << 5) - (1 << 1)
So the final expression for the mask is:
mask = (1 << msb) + (1 << msb) - (1 << lsb);
The bits to be rotated can be selected by a bitwise AND with the mask:
to_rotate = value & mask;
...and the bits that will be left untouched can be selected by a AND with the inverted mask:
untouched = value & ~mask;
The rotation itself can be performed easily in two parts: first, we can obtain the leftmost bits of the rotated portion by simply rotating to_rotate left and discarding any bits that fall outside the mask:
left = (to_rotate << shift) & mask;
To get the rightmost bits, rotate to_rotate right by (n - shift) bits, where n is the number of bits we're rotating (this n can be calculated as msb + 1 - lsb):
right = (to_rotate >> (msb + 1 - lsb - shift)) & mask;
The final result can be obtained by combining all the bits from untouched, left, and right:
result = untouched | left | right;
Your original example would work like this (msb is 5, lsb is 1, and shift is 1):
value = 01011010
mask = 00111110 from (1 << 5) + (1 << 5) - (1 << 1)
01011010 value
& 00111110 mask
----------
to_rotate = 00011010
01011010 value
& 11000001 ~mask (i.e. inverted mask)
----------
untouched = 01000000
00110100 to_rotate << 1
& 00111110 mask
----------
left = 00110100
00000001 to_rotate >> 4 (5 + 1 - 1 - 1 = 4)
& 00111110 mask
----------
right = 00000000
01000000 untouched
00110100 left
| 00000000 right
----------
result = 01110100
Here's a different example with a 16-bit input value, msb = 15, lsb = 4, and shift = 4 (which rotates the top 3 hex digits of a 4-digit hex value):
value = 0101011001111000 (0x5678)
mask = 1111111111110000 from (1 << 15) + (1 << 15) - (1 << 4)
0101011001111000 value
& 1111111111110000 mask
------------------
to_rotate = 0101011001110000
0101011001111000 value
& 0000000000001111 ~mask
------------------
untouched = 0000000000001000
0110011100000000 to_rotate << 4
& 1111111111110000 mask
------------------
left = 0110011100000000
0000000001010110 to_rotate >> 8 (15 + 1 - 4 - 4 = 8)
& 1111111111110000 mask
------------------
right = 0000000001010000
0000000000001000 untouched
0110011100000000 left
| 0000000001010000 right
------------------
result = 0110011101011000 = 0x6758
Here's a working implementation in C that is not highly optimised but which might at least serve as a starting point for any further implementations. It works with ints but you can adapt it for any word size, or just use it as is and mask out any unwanted high order bits (e.g. if you are working with individual bytes). I broke the functionality down into two lower level routines for extracting a bit and inserting a bit - these may have other uses, I imagine.
//
// bits.c
//
#include <stdio.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
//
// extract_bit
//
// extract bit at given index and move less significant bits left
//
int extract_bit(int *word, int index)
{
int result = (*word & (1 << index)) != 0;
int mask = (1 << index) + (1 << index) - 1;
*word = ((*word << 1) & mask) | (*word & ~mask);
return result;
}
//
// insert_bit
//
// insert bit at given index and move less significant bits right
//
void insert_bit(int *word, int index, int val)
{
int mask1 = (1 << index) + (1 << index) - 1;
int mask2 = (1 << index) - 1;
*word = ((*word >> 1) & mask2) | (*word & ~mask1) | (val << index);
}
//
// move_bit
//
// move bit from given src index to given dest index
//
int move_bit(int *word, int src_index, int dest_index)
{
int val = extract_bit(word, src_index);
insert_bit(word, dest_index, val);
return val;
}
int main(int argc, char * argv[])
{
if (argc > 2)
{
int test = 0x55555555;
int index1 = atoi(argv[1]);
int index2 = atoi(argv[2]);
printf("test (before) = %#x\n", test);
printf("index (src) = %d\n", index1);
printf("index (dest) = %d\n", index2);
move_bit(&test, index1, index2);
printf("test (after) = %#x\n", test);
}
return 0;
}
This likely doesn't qualify as "elegant," but you might be able to cram it into one line if that is your kind of thing? The plan is to split the number into four pieces (shouldn't be hard with bit operations, right?), do the appropriate things to them, and then put the three pieces back together.
Number: 01x1 10y1
P1 (before x): 0100 0000
P2 (just bit x): 00x0 0000
P3 (between x and y): 0001 10y0
P4 (after y): 0000 0001
Then the number you want is [P1] + [P3 shifted up by 1] + [P2 shifted down by 4] + [P4].
P1: 0100 0000
P2 shifted down by 3: 0000 00x0
P3 shifted up by 1: 0011 0y00
P4: 0000 0001
Sum: 0111 0yx1
Are you using bits to conserve space? Is it REALLY needed?
You might be better off with a list class that allows you to remove and insert items in the list. In your case the items would be Booleans.
I'm in a little trouble here.
Can anyone help me implement a solution that reverses every byte so 0xAB becomes 0xBA but not so "abcd" becomes "dcba". I need it so AB CD EF becomes BA DC FE.
Preferably in C or C++ but it doesn't really matter provided it can run.
So far, I've implemented a UBER CRAPPY solution that doesn't even work (and yes, I know that converting to string and back to binary is a crappy solution) in PureBasic.
OpenConsole()
filename$ = OpenFileRequester("Open File","","All types | *.*",0)
If filename$ = ""
End
EndIf
OpenFile(0,filename$)
*Byte = AllocateMemory(1)
ProcessedBytes = 0
Loc=Loc(0)
Repeat
FileSeek(0,Loc(0)+1)
PokeB(*Byte,ReadByte(0))
BitStr$ = RSet(Bin(Asc(PeekS(*Byte))),16,"0")
FirstStr$ = Left(BitStr$,8)
SecondStr$ = Right(BitStr$,8)
BitStr$ = SecondStr$ + FirstStr$
Bit.b = Val(BitStr$)
WriteByte(0,Bit)
ProcessedBytes = ProcessedBytes + 1
ClearConsole()
Print("Processed Bytes: ")
Print(Str(ProcessedBytes))
Loc=Loc(0)
Until Loc = Lof(0)
Delay(10000)
Thanks for reading.
Reading your PureBasic code (I skipped it at first), it does seem you want to swap endian, even though it's not what your text is asking—0xAB practically always means a byte with decimal value 171, not two bytes, and it's extremely common to display a byte as two hex digits, where you use A-F in your example.
#include <iostream>
int main() {
using namespace std;
for (char a; cin.get(a);) {
char b;
if (!cin.get(b)) {
cout.put(a); // better to write it than lose it
cerr << "Damn it, input ends with an odd byte, is it in "
"the right format?\n";
return 1;
}
cout.put(b);
cout.put(a);
}
return 0;
}
// C version is a similar easy translation from the original code
import numpy
import sys
numpy.fromfile(sys.stdin, numpy.int16).byteswap(True).tofile(sys.stdout)
Original answer:
I'm not sure why you want this (it doesn't convert endian, for example, if you want that), but here you go:
#include <stdio.h>
int main() {
for (char c; (c == getchar()) != EOF;) {
putchar((c & 0xF << 4) | ((int)c & 0xF0 >> 4));
}
return 0;
}
#include <iostream>
int main() {
for (char c; std::cin.get(c);) {
std::cout.put((c & 0xF << 4) | ((int)c & 0xF0 >> 4));
}
return 0;
}
import sys
for line in sys.stdin:
sys.stdout.write("".join(
chr((ord(c) & 0xF << 4) | (ord(c) & 0xF0 >> 4))
for c in line
))
All assume that text translations don't occur (such as \n to \r\n and vice versa); you'll have to change them to opening files in binary mode if that's the case. They read from stdin and write to stdout, if you're unfamiliar with that, so just use programname < inputfile > outputfile to run them.
Reversing the high and low half-byte is possible through a simple arithmetic formula (assuming you operate on unsigned bytes):
reversed = (original % 16) * 16 + (original / 16);
A Haskell solution:
module ReverseBytes where
import qualified Data.ByteString as B
import Data.Bits
import Data.Word
-----------------------------------------------------------
main :: IO ()
main = B.getContents >>= B.putStr . B.map reverseByte
reverseByte :: Word8 -> Word8
reverseByte = flip rotate 4
runghc ReverseBytes.hs < inputfile > outputfile