Number of steps to reduce a number in binary representation to 1 - c++

Given the binary representation of an integer as a string s, return the number of steps to reduce it to 1 under the following rules:
If the current number is even, you have to divide it by 2.
If the current number is odd, you have to add 1 to it.
It is guaranteed that you can always reach one for all test cases.
Step 1) 13 is odd, add 1 and obtain 14.
Step 2) 14 is even, divide by 2 and obtain 7.
Step 3) 7 is odd, add 1 and obtain 8.
Step 4) 8 is even, divide by 2 and obtain 4.
Step 5) 4 is even, divide by 2 and obtain 2.
Step 6) 2 is even, divide by 2 and obtain 1.
My input = 1111011110000011100000110001011011110010111001010111110001
Expected output = 85
My output = 81
For the above input, the output is supposed to be 85. But my output shows 81. For other test cases it
seems to be giving the right answer. I have been trying all possible debugs, but I am stuck.
#include <iostream>
#include <string.h>
#include <vector>
#include <bits/stdc++.h>
using namespace std;
int main()
{
string s =
"1111011110000011100000110001011011110010111001010111110001";
long int count = 0, size;
unsigned long long int dec = 0;
size = s.size();
// cout << s[size - 1] << endl;
for (int i = 0; i < size; i++)
{
// cout << pow(2, size - i - 1) << endl;
if (s[i] == '0')
continue;
// cout<<int(s[i])-48<<endl;
dec += (int(s[i]) - 48) * pow(2, size - 1 - i);
}
// cout << dec << endl;
// dec = 278675673186014705;
while (dec != 1)
{
if (dec % 2 == 0)
dec /= 2;
else
dec += 1;
count += 1;
}
cout << count;
return 0;
}

This line:
pow(2, size - 1 - i)
Can face precision errors as pow takes and returns doubles.
Luckily, for powers base 2 that won't overflow unsigned long longs, we can simply use bit shift (which is equivalent to pow(2, x)).
Replace that line with:
1LL<<(size - 1 - i)
So that it should look like this:
dec += (int(s[i]) - 48) * 1ULL<<(size - 1 - i);
And we will get the correct output of 85.
Note: as mentioned by #RSahu, you can remove (int(s[i]) - 48), as the case where int(s[i]) == '0' is already caught in an above if statement. Simply change the line to:
dec += 1ULL<<(size - 1 - i);

The core problem has already been pointed out in answer by #Ryan Zhang.
I want to offer some suggestions to improve your code and make it easier to debug.
The main function has two parts -- first part coverts a string to number and the second part computes the number of steps to get the number to 1. I suggest creating two helper functions. That will allow you to debug each piece separately.
int main()
{
string s = "1111011110000011100000110001011011110010111001010111110001";
unsigned long long int dec = stringToNumber(s);
cout << "Number: " << dec << endl;
// dec = 278675673186014705;
int count = getStepsTo1(dec);
cout << "Steps to 1: " << count << endl;
return 0;
}
Iterate over the string from right to left using std::string::reverse_iterator. That will obviate the need for size and use of size - i - 1. You can just use i.
unsigned long long stringToNumber(string const& s)
{
size_t i = 0;
unsigned long long num = 0;
for (auto it = s.rbegin(); it != s.rend(); ++it, ++i )
{
if (*it != '0')
{
num += 1ULL << i;
}
}
return num;
}
Here's the other helper function.
int getStepsTo1(unsigned long long num)
{
long int count = 0;
while (num != 1 )
{
if (num % 2 == 0)
num /= 2;
else
num += 1;
count += 1;
}
return count;
}
Working demo: https://ideone.com/yerRfK.

Related

Josephus Problem Clockwise find the Safe Position base on the number of people(n) is there anyway to improve the code?

According to Numberphile if (n) number of soldiers is a power of 2 regardless of starting position the answer will always be the starting position
please refer to this image... and if not please refer to this image i hope you understand my simple illustration on the problem thank you...
/*
formulas: *1 if (n) is power of 2 then the answer is 1
*W(n) = 2l + 1
version 0.4
*/
#include<iostream>
#include<string>
using namespace std;
bool isPowerofTwo(int n){
return (n & (n - 1)) == 0;
}
int bin_to_dec(long n){
int dec = 0, i = 0, rem, base = 1;
while (n != 0) {
dec += (n % 10) * base;
n /= 10;
base *= 2;
}
return dec;
}
int main(){
//var1: input of (n) var2: bin as "binary var3: str for string"
unsigned int n, i, bin;
string str;
cout<<"Input (n): ";
cin>>n;
if(isPowerofTwo(n)){
cout<<"The safe position is no. " << 1 << endl;
} else {
while(n!=0){//decimal to binary conversion
str = (n % 2 == 0 ? "0":"1") + str;
n/=2;
}
str.erase(0,1); //erasing the largest binary (the leftmost because it is not needed)
bin = stoi(str); //converting string to int
cout<<"The safe position is no. " << (bin_to_dec(bin) * 2) + 1; //converting binary to get the 2l+1
}
return 0;
}
#include<math.h>
bool isPowerofTwo(int n){
return (ceil(log2(n)) == floor(log2(n)));
}
The definition of ceil() is double ceil(double x);. Same goes for floor() and log2(). You are calling some expensive floating point functions here that are also inprecise.
bool isPowerofTwo(usigned int n) {
return (n & (n - 1)) == 0;
}
Subtracting 1 will turn the lowest 1 bit in n into a 0. The bitwise AND then eliminates the lowest 1 bit in n. If n is a power of 2 then it has only 1 bit set. That means the AND gives 0.
In main also use unsigned int for everything that can't be negative. It often produces simpler code, like for example n % 2 can be complicated if the cpus % operation gives different results for negative numbers than the standard requires (or you use MSVC and it thinks that's the case).

Find One to N is Prime optimization

So I was inspired by a recent Youtube video from the Numberphile Channel. This one to be exact. Cut to around the 5 minute mark for the exact question or example that I am referring to.
TLDR; A number is created with all the digits corresponding to 1 to N. Example: 1 to 10 is the number 12,345,678,910. Find out if this number is prime. According to the video, N has been checked up to 1,000,000.
From the code below, I have taken the liberty of starting this process at 1,000,000 and only going to 10,000,000. I'm hoping to increase this to a larger number later.
So my question or the assistance that I need is optimization for this problem. I'm sure each number will still take very long to check but even a minimal percentage of optimization would go a long way.
Edit 1: Optimize which division numbers are used. Ideally this divisionNumber would only be prime numbers.
Here is the code:
#include <iostream>
#include <chrono>
#include <ctime>
namespace
{
int myPow(int x, int p)
{
if (p == 0) return 1;
if (p == 1) return x;
if (p == 2) return x * x;
int tmp = myPow(x, p / 2);
if (p % 2 == 0) return tmp * tmp;
else return x * tmp * tmp;
}
int getNumDigits(unsigned int num)
{
int count = 0;
while (num != 0)
{
num /= 10;
++count;
}
return count;
}
unsigned int getDigit(unsigned int num, int position)
{
int digit = num % myPow(10, getNumDigits(num) - (position - 1));
return digit / myPow(10, getNumDigits(num) - position);
}
unsigned int getTotalDigits(int num)
{
unsigned int total = 0;
for (int i = 1; i <= num; i++)
total += getNumDigits(i);
return total;
}
// Returns the 'index'th digit of number created from 1 to num
int getIndexDigit(int num, int index)
{
if (index <= 9)
return index;
for (int i = 10; i <= num; i++)
{
if (getTotalDigits(i) >= index)
return getDigit(i, getNumDigits(i) - (getTotalDigits(i) - index));
}
}
// Can this be optimized?
int floorSqrt(int x)
{
if (x == 0 || x == 1)
return x;
int i = 1, result = 1;
while (result <= x)
{
i++;
result = i * i;
}
return i - 1;
}
void PrintTime(double num, int i)
{
constexpr double SECONDS_IN_HOUR = 3600;
constexpr double SECONDS_IN_MINUTE = 60;
double totalSeconds = num;
int hours = totalSeconds / SECONDS_IN_HOUR;
int minutes = (totalSeconds - (hours * SECONDS_IN_HOUR)) / SECONDS_IN_MINUTE;
int seconds = totalSeconds - (hours * SECONDS_IN_HOUR) - (minutes * SECONDS_IN_MINUTE);
std::cout << "Elapsed time for " << i << ": " << hours << "h, " << minutes << "m, " << seconds << "s\n";
}
}
int main()
{
constexpr unsigned int MAX_NUM_CHECK = 10000000;
for (int i = 1000000; i <= MAX_NUM_CHECK; i++)
{
auto start = std::chrono::system_clock::now();
int digitIndex = 1;
// Simplifying this to move to the next i in the loop early:
// if i % 2 then the last digit is a 0, 2, 4, 6, or 8 and is therefore divisible by 2
// if i % 5 then the last digit is 0 or 5 and is therefore divisible by 5
if (i % 2 == 0 || i % 5 == 0)
{
std::cout << i << " not prime" << '\n';
auto end = std::chrono::system_clock::now();
std::chrono::duration<double> elapsed_seconds = end - start;
PrintTime(elapsed_seconds.count(), i);
continue;
}
bool isPrime = true;
int divisionNumber = 3;
int floorNum = floorSqrt(i);
while (divisionNumber <= floorNum && isPrime)
{
if (divisionNumber % 5 == 0)
{
divisionNumber += 2;
continue;
}
int number = 0;
int totalDigits = getTotalDigits(i);
// This section does the division necessary to iterate through each digit of the 1 to N number
// Example: Think of dividing 124 into 123456 on paper and how you would iterate through that process
while (digitIndex <= totalDigits)
{
number *= 10;
number += getIndexDigit(i, digitIndex);
number %= divisionNumber;
digitIndex++;
}
if (number == 0)
{
isPrime = false;
break;
}
divisionNumber += 2;
}
if (isPrime)
std::cout << "N = " << i << " is prime." << '\n';
else
std::cout << i << " not prime" << '\n';
auto end = std::chrono::system_clock::now();
std::chrono::duration<double> elapsed_seconds = end - start;
PrintTime(elapsed_seconds.count(), i);
}
}
Its nice to see you are working on the same question I pondered few months ago.
Please refer to question posted in Math Stackexchange for better resources.
TL-DR,
The number you are looking for is called SmarandachePrime.
As per your code, it seems you are dividing with every number that is not a multiple of 2,5. To optimize you can actually check for n = 6k+1 ( 𝑘 ∈ ℕ ).
unfortunately, it is still not a better approach with respect to the number you are dealing with.
The better approach is to use primality test screening to find probable prime numbers in the sequence and then check whether they are prime or not. These tests take a less time ~(O(k log3n)) to check whether a number is prime or not, using mathematical fundamentals, compared to division.
there are several libraries that provide functions for primality check.
for python, you can use gmpy2 library, which uses Miller-Rabin Primality test to find probable primes.
I recommend you to further read about different Primality tests here.
I believe you are missing one very important check, and it's the division by 3:
A number can be divided by 3 is the sum of the numbers can be divided by 3, and your number consists of all numbers from 1 to N.
The sum of all numbers from 1 to N equals:
N * (N+1) / 2
This means that, if N or N+1 can be divided by 3, then your number cannot be prime.
So before you do anything, check MOD(N,3) and MOD(N+1,3). If either one of them equals zero, you can't have a prime number.

why am I getiing 0 as a result,I want the return value as the result?

I want the result to be the returned value from the mystery function,but the result is always 0 .but I want the program to return a value that's collected from the mystery function
#include <iostream>
using namespace std;
int Mystery(int n)
{
// int k;
if (n <= 1)
{
return 0;
}
else
{
int k = n;
for (int i = 1; i <= n; i++)
{
k = k + 5;
}
cout << ((k * (n / 2)) + (8 * (n / 4)));
cout << "\n ";
return ((k * Mystery(n / 2)) + (8 * Mystery(n / 4)));
}
}
int main(void)
{
int i, n;
cout << "Enter n:"; //array size
cin >> n;
int result = Mystery(n);
cout << "The result is " << result;
return 0;
}
Let's desk check what happens when you call Mystery(2). The final return value is:
((k* Mystery(n/2)) + (8* Mystery(n/4)))
We know that n == 2 so let's substitute that:
((k* Mystery(1)) + (8* Mystery(0 /* by integer division of 2/4 */)))
This will call the function recursively twice with the respective arguments 1 and 0. But we know that the terminating case n <= 1 returns 0, so we can substitute that:
((k* 0) + (8* 0))
Anything multiplied by zero is zero, so this reduces to 0 + 0 which is also zero. It doesn't even matter what k is.
Quite simply, the terminating case for this recursion mandates that the result is always zero.
In the terminating case the return value is zero.
In the recursive case, the recursive call result is multiplied with another value to produce the return value.
Therefore, the result is always going to be zero for any n.
I'm not sure exactly how this function is supposed to work as you have not explained that, but changing the terminating case to return 1; may solve the problem.
I don't expect which result you want, but I think you can get write result when you correct conditions like
if (n == 0)
return 0;
if (n == 1)
return 1;
I hope it returns the right result.

C++ Program abruptly ends after cin

I am writing code to get the last digit of very large fibonacci numbers such as fib(239), etc.. I am using strings to store the numbers, grabbing the individual chars from end to beginning and then converting them to int and than storing the values back into another string. I have not been able to test what I have written because my program keeps abruptly closing after the std::cin >> n; line.
Here is what I have so far.
#include <iostream>
#include <string>
using std::cin;
using std::cout;
using namespace std;
char get_fibonacci_last_digit_naive(int n) {
cout << "in func";
if (n <= 1)
return (char)n;
string previous= "0";
string current= "1";
for (int i = 0; i < n - 1; ++i) {
//long long tmp_previous = previous;
string tmp_previous= previous;
previous = current;
//current = tmp_previous + current; // could also use previous instead of current
// for with the current length of the longest of the two strings
//iterates from the end of the string to the front
for (int j=current.length(); j>=0; --j) {
// grab consectutive positions in the strings & convert them to integers
int t;
if (tmp_previous.at(j) == '\0')
// tmp_previous is empty use 0 instead
t=0;
else
t = stoi((string&)(tmp_previous.at(j)));
int c = stoi((string&)(current.at(j)));
// add the integers together
int valueAtJ= t+c;
// store the value into the equivalent position in current
current.at(j) = (char)(valueAtJ);
}
cout << current << ":current value";
}
return current[current.length()-1];
}
int main() {
int n;
std::cin >> n;
//char& c = get_fibonacci_last_digit_naive(n); // reference to a local variable returned WARNING
// http://stackoverflow.com/questions/4643713/c-returning-reference-to-local-variable
cout << "before call";
char c = get_fibonacci_last_digit_naive(n);
std::cout << c << '\n';
return 0;
}
The output is consistently the same. No matter what I enter for n, the output is always the same. This is the line I used to run the code and its output.
$ g++ -pipe -O2 -std=c++14 fibonacci_last_digit.cpp -lm
$ ./a.exe
10
There is a newline after the 10 and the 10 is what I input for n.
I appreciate any help. And happy holidays!
I'm posting this because your understanding of the problem seems to be taking a backseat to the choice of solution you're attempting to deploy. This is an example of an XY Problem, a problem where the choice of solution method and problems or roadblocks with its implementation obfuscates the actual problem you're trying to solve.
You are trying to calculate the final digit of the Nth Fibonacci number, where N could be gregarious. The basic understanding of the fibonacci sequence tells you that
fib(0) = 0
fib(1) = 1
fib(n) = fib(n-1) + fib(n-2), for all n larger than 1.
The iterative solution to solving fib(N) for its value would be:
unsigned fib(unsigned n)
{
if (n <= 1)
return n;
unsigned previous = 0;
unsigned current = 1;
for (int i=1; i<n; ++i)
{
unsigned value = previous + current;
previous = current;
current = value;
}
return current;
}
which is all well and good, but will obviously overflow once N causes an overflow of the storage capabilities of our chosen data type (in the above case, unsigned on most 32bit platforms will overflow after a mere 47 iterations).
But we don't need the actual fib values for each iteration. We only need the last digit of each iteration. Well, the base-10 last-digit is easy enough to get from any unsigned value. For our example, simply replace this:
current = value;
with this:
current = value % 10;
giving us a near-identical algorithm, but one that only "remembers" the last digit on each iteration:
unsigned fib_last_digit(unsigned n)
{
if (n <= 1)
return n;
unsigned previous = 0;
unsigned current = 1;
for (int i=1; i<n; ++i)
{
unsigned value = previous + current;
previous = current;
current = value % 10; // HERE
}
return current;
}
Now current always holds the single last digit of the prior sum, whether that prior sum exceeded 10 or not really isn't relevant to us. Once we have that the next iteration can use it to calculate the sum of two single positive digits, which cannot exceed 18, and again, we only need the last digit from that for the next iteration, etc.. This continues until we iterate however many times requested, and when finished, the final answer will present itself.
Validation
We know the first 20 or so fibonacci numbers look like this, run through fib:
0:0
1:1
2:1
3:2
4:3
5:5
6:8
7:13
8:21
9:34
10:55
11:89
12:144
13:233
14:377
15:610
16:987
17:1597
18:2584
19:4181
20:6765
Here's what we get when we run the algorithm through fib_last_digit instead:
0:0
1:1
2:1
3:2
4:3
5:5
6:8
7:3
8:1
9:4
10:5
11:9
12:4
13:3
14:7
15:0
16:7
17:7
18:4
19:1
20:5
That should give you a budding sense of confidence this is likely the algorithm you seek, and you can forego the string manipulations entirely.
Running this code on a Mac I get:
libc++abi.dylib: terminating with uncaught exception of type std::out_of_range: basic_string before callin funcAbort trap: 6
The most obvious problem with the code itself is in the following line:
for (int j=current.length(); j>=0; --j) {
Reasons:
If you are doing things like current.at(j), this will crash immediately. For example, the string "blah" has length 4, but there is no character at position 4.
The length of tmp_previous may be different from current. Calling tmp_previous.at(j) will crash when you go from 8 to 13 for example.
Additionally, as others have pointed out, if the the only thing you're interested in is the last digit, you do not need to go through the trouble of looping through every digit of every number. The trick here is to only remember the last digit of previous and current, so large numbers are never a problem and you don't have to do things like stoi.
As an alternative to a previous answer would be the string addition.
I tested it with the fibonacci number of 100000 and it works fine in just a few seconds. Working only with the last digit solves your problem for even larger numbers for sure. for all of you requiring the fibonacci number as well, here an algorithm:
std::string str_add(std::string a, std::string b)
{
// http://ideone.com/o7wLTt
size_t n = max(a.size(), b.size());
if (n > a.size()) {
a = string(n-a.size(), '0') + a;
}
if (n > b.size()) {
b = string(n-b.size(), '0') + b;
}
string result(n + 1, '0');
char carry = 0;
std::transform(a.rbegin(), a.rend(), b.rbegin(), result.rbegin(), [&carry](char x, char y)
{
char z = (x - '0') + (y - '0') + carry;
if (z > 9) {
carry = 1;
z -= 10;
} else {
carry = 0;
}
return z + '0';
});
result[0] = carry + '0';
n = result.find_first_not_of("0");
if (n != string::npos) {
result = result.substr(n);
}
return result;
}
std::string str_fib(size_t i)
{
std::string n1 = "0";
std::string n2 = "1";
for (size_t idx = 0; idx < i; ++idx) {
const std::string f = str_add(n1, n2);
n1 = n2;
n2 = f;
}
return n1;
}
int main() {
const size_t i = 100000;
const std::string f = str_fib(i);
if (!f.empty()) {
std::cout << "fibonacci of " << i << " = " << f << " | last digit: " << f[f.size() - 1] << std::endl;
}
std::cin.sync(); std::cin.get();
return 0;
}
Try it with first calculating the fibonacci number and then converting the int to a std::string using std::to_string(). in the following you can extract the last digit using the [] operator on the last index.
int fib(int i)
{
int number = 1;
if (i > 2) {
number = fib(i - 1) + fib(i - 2);
}
return number;
}
int main() {
const int i = 10;
const int f = fib(i);
const std::string s = std::to_string(f);
if (!s.empty()) {
std::cout << "fibonacci of " << i << " = " << f << " | last digit: " << s[s.size() - 1] << std::endl;
}
std::cin.sync(); std::cin.get();
return 0;
}
Avoid duplicates of the using keyword using.
Also consider switching from int to long or long long when your numbers get bigger. Since the fibonacci numbers are positive, also use unsigned.

Dividing an even number in the most efficient way

I need a program in c++ that gets a number:
LOOP:
If that number is even divide it by 2 (n=n/2)
If it's not even you can do one of this operations:
n+1
n-1
LOOP ENDS
The program should do this until n=1.
But it should do this in the most efficient and fastest way and the only hint I have is that I can use DP approach.
And the output should be numbers of operations used to calculate that number.
For example:
15->16->8->4->2->1 output:5
35->36->18->9->8->4->2->1 output:7
here's the code I wrote but it's not completed yet and it's wrong since I couldn't figure out how should I add or subtract in each step:
#include "stdafx.h"
#include <iostream>
using namespace std;
int main()
{
int n;
int h=0;
int i=0;
cout<<"Enter A Number:";
cin >> n;
int r=n;
int q=n;
cout<<r;
L1: while ( r % 2 == 0)
{
for(int m=0;r>1 && m==0 ;)
{ r=r / 2;h++;
m=r%2;
cout<<" => "<<r;
}}
while(r%2==1 && r>1)
{r=r-1;cout<<" => "<<r;h++;
goto L1;}
cout<<endl;
//**********************
cout<<q;
L2: while ( q % 2 == 0)
{
for(int m=0;q>1 && m==0 ;)
{ q=q / 2;i++;
m=q%2;
cout<<" => "<<q;
}}
while(q%2==1 && q>1)
{q=q+1;cout<<" => "<<q;i++;
goto L2;}
cout<<endl<<"First:"<<h<<endl<<"Second:"<<i<<endl;
system("pause");
}
If you want to solve it using DP:
I would state this: for each possible value 1 <=i < N find the optimal number of steps.
We use a priority queue to do this where we extract at each iteration the highest number. This is much more efficient than a vector of length N because a lot of states are unreachable (e.g. i=10 in the 15 example).
Consider that the starting state is (15,0): 15 with zero moves.
From this you create two new states (8,2) and (7,2) because for each you need two steps(add/subtract + division).
Extracting (8,2): (7,2)(4,3)
Extracting (7,2): (4,3)(3,4) Here comes DP! (7,2) would create the state (4,4) but you mantain in the queue only the minimum number of steps for the same state.
Extracting (4,3): (2,4)(3,4)
extracting(3,4): (2,4)(1,6)
Extracting (2,4): (1,5)
And that is it the solution is 5 steps.
Steps for 35:
(35,0) --- >(18,2) (17,2) -----> (17,2) (9,3) ----->
(9,3)(8,4) ----> (8,4)(5,5)(4,5) ----> (5,5)(4,5) ----->
(4,5)(3,7)(2,7)----> (3,7)(2,6) -----> (2,6)(1,9) ----> (1,7)
Solution: 7 steps.
Look if that helps you.
// Example program
#include <iostream>
#include <string>
int f (int n)
{
int iterations = 0;
while (n > 1)
{
if (n % 2 != 0)
{
std::cout << n << "->";
++n;
if (n & (n - 1))
n -= 2;
++iterations;
}
std::cout << n << "->";
n >>= 1;
++iterations;
}
std::cout << n << "->";
return iterations;
}
int main()
{
std::cout << f(15) << std::endl;
std::cout << f(41) << std::endl;
std::cout << f(43) << std::endl;
}
For use of dynamic programming, you should make recursion to get sub-solutions to the problem and then solve the problem itself. You also have to use a memory structure to hold the results of such sub-solutions.
#include <deque>
#include <iostream>
using namespace std;
int solve(deque<int>& solution, int number) {
if(number >= solution.size()) // resize to fit
solution.resize(number + 1, -1);
if(number == 1) // special case for number 1
return solution[number] = 0;
if(solution[number] != -1) // if already calculated
return solution[number];
if(number % 2 == 0) // n=n/2
return solution[number] = solve(solution, number/2) + 1;
int solutionA = solve(solution, number + 1); // n++
int solutionB = solve(solution, number - 1); // n--
return solution[number] = std::min(solutionA, solutionB) + 1; // best of n++,n--
}
int main() {
deque<int> solution;
cout << solve(solution, 35);
}
I'm not sure the code will work though.
Here's my recursive solution, verified up to 2097152 against the DP example.
The basis of it is using the value of the last two bits to determine the optimal operation. If the last bit is a 0, we always divide. If the last two bits are 11 we always increment as this transforms to 100 which enables two consecutive divide operations.
If the last two bits are 01 we decrement as this gives our next operation two consecutive divide operations vs incrementing which gives us 10.
The corner case is the number 3 where 3 -> 2 is desired over promotion to 4.
I suspect you can optimise this further by just scanning the bit pattern to determine the number of operations required. i.e. each zero requires a div op, and a set of ones can be changed into zeroes with a single addition.
#include <cstdint>
int solve_algorithmically(std::uint64_t number)
{
// If 1 there is nothing to do.
if (number <= 1)
return 0;
// Nasty hack to get around the case where number=3 & 3 == 3 will cause increment
if (number == 3)
return solve_algorithmically(number - 1) + 1;
// If we have an even number (0 in LSB)
if ((number & 1) == 0)
return solve_algorithmically(number / 2) + 1;
// If we have two consecutive 1's i.e. (...11) then increment as this wil give us two zeroes.
// The exception is the root case 3 where decrement wins.
if ((number & 3) == 3)
return solve_algorithmically(number + 1) + 1;
// The only other case ends last two bits = 01
return solve_algorithmically(number - 1) + 1;
}
int main() {
for (auto i = 1; i < 2097152; i++)
{
int alg = solve_algorithmically(i);
}
}