Related
Is there a way to set every nth bit in an integer without using a for loop?
For example, if n = 3, then the result should be ...100100100100. This is easy enough with a for loop, but I am curious if this can be done without one.
--
For my particular application, I need to do this with a custom 256-bit integer type, that has all the bit operations that a built-in integer has. I'm currently using lazily initialized tables (using for loops) and that is good enough for what I'm doing. This was mostly an exercise in bit-twidling for me, but I couldn't figure out how to do it in a few steps/instructions, and couldn't easily find anything online about this.
… I need to do this with a custom 256-bit integer type.
Set r to 256 % n.
Set d to ((uint256_t) 1 << n) - 1. Then the binary representation of d is a string of n 1 bits.
Set t to UINT256_MAX << r >> r. This removes the top r bits from UINT256_MAX. UINT256_MAX is of course 2256−1. This leaves t as a string of width-r 1 bits, and width-r is some multiple of n, say k*n.
Set t to t/d. As a string of k*n 1 bits divided by a string of n 1 bits, this produces a quotient that is 000…0001 repeated k times, where each 000…0001 is n-1 0 bits followed by one 1 bit.
Now t is the desired bit pattern except the highest desired bit may be missing if r is not zero. To add this bit, if needed, OR t with t << n.
Now t is the desired value.
Alternately:
Set t to 1.
OR t with t << n.
OR t with t << 2*n.
OR t with t << 4*n.
OR t with t << 8*n.
OR t with t << 16*n.
OR t with t << 32*n.
OR t with t << 64*n.
OR t with t << 128*n.
Those shifts must be defined (shifting by zero would suffice) or suppressed when the shift amount exceeds the integer width, 256 bits.
I found this loop in the source code of an algorithm. I think that details about the problems aren't relevant here, because this is a really small part of the solution.
void update(int i, int value, int array[], int n) {
for(; i < n; i += ~i & (i + 1)) {
array[i] += value;
}
}
I don't really understand what happens in that for loop, is it some sort of trick? I found something similar named Fenwick trees, but they look a bit different than what I have here.
Any ideas what this loop means?
Also, found this :
"Bit Hack #9. Isolate the rightmost 0-bit.
y = ~x & (x+1)
"
You are correct: the bit-hack ~i & (i + 1) should evaluate to an integer which is all binary 0's, except the one corresponding to the rightmost zero-bit of i, which is set to binary 1.
So at the end of each pass of the for loop, it adds this value to itself. Since the corresponding bit in i is zero, this has the effect of setting it, without affecting any other bits in i. This will strictly increase the value of i at each pass, until i overflows (or becomes -1, if you started with i<0). In context, you can probably expect that it is called with i>=0, and that i < n is set terminate the loop before your index walks off the array.
The overall function should have the effect of iterating through the zero-bits of the original value of i from least- to most-significant, setting them one by one, and incrementing the corresponding elements of the array.
Fenwick trees are a clever way to accumulate and query statistics efficiently; as you say, their update loop looks a bit like this, and typically uses a comparable bit-hack. There are bound to be multiple ways to accomplish this kind of bit-fiddling, so it is certainly possible that your source code is updating a Fenwick tree, or something comparable.
Assume that from the right to the left, you have some number of 1 bits, a 0 bit, and then more bits in x.
If you add x + 1, then all the 1's at the right are changed to 0, the 0 is changed to 1, the rest is unchanged. For example xxxx011 + 1 = xxxx100.
In ~x, you have the same number of 0 bits, a 1 bit, and the inverses of the other bits. The bitwise and produces the 0 bits, one 1 bit, and since the remaining bits are and'ed with their negation, those bits are 0.
So the result of ~x & (x + 1) is a number with one 1 bit where x had its rightmost zero bit.
If you add this to x, you change the rightmost 0 to a 1. So if you do this repeatedly, you change the 0 bits in x to 1, from the right to the left.
The update function iterates and sets the 0-bits of i from the leftmost zero to the rightmost zero and add value to the ith element of array.
The for loop checks if i is less than n, if so, ~i & (i + 1) would be an integer has all binary 0's, except for the rightmost bit ( i.e. 1). Then array[i] += value adds value to iterated itself.
Setting i to 8 and going through iterations may clear things to you.
I am finding pow(2,i) where i can range: 0<=i<=100000.
Apart i have MOD=1000000007
powers[100000];
powers[0]=1;
for (i = 1; i <=100000; ++i)
{
powers[i]=(powers[i-1]*2)%MOD;
}
for i=100000 won't power value become greater than MOD ?
How do I store the power correctly?
The operation doesn't look feasible to me.
I am getting correct value up to i=70 max I guess.
I have to find sum+= ar[i]*power(2,i) and finally print sum%1000000007 where ar[i] is an additional array with some big numbers up to 10^5
As long as your modulus value is less than half the capacity of your data type, it will never be exceeded. That's because you take the previous value in the range 0..1000000006, double it, then re-modulo it bringing it back to that same range.
However, I can't guarantee that higher values won't cause you troubles, it's more mathematical analysis than I'm prepared to invest given the simple alternative. You could spend a lot of time analysing, checking and debugging, but it's probably better just to not allow the problem to occur in the first place.
The alternative? I'd tend to use the pre-generation method (having a program do the gruntwork up front, inserting the pre-generated values into an array easily and speedily accessible from your real program).
With this method, you can use tools that are well tested and known to work with massive values. Since this data is not going to change, it's useless calculating it every time your program starts.
If you want an easy (and efficient) way to do this, the following bash script in conjunction with bc and awk can do this:
#!/usr/bin/bash
bc >nums.txt <<EOF
i = 1;
for (x = 0;x <= 10000; x++) {
i % 1000000007;
i = i * 2;
}
EOF
awk 'BEGIN { printf "static int array[] = {" }
{ if (NR % 5 == 1) printf "\n ";
printf "%s, ",$0;
next
}
END { print "\n};" }' nums.txt
The bc part is the "meat" of the matter, it creates the large powers of two and outputs them modulo the number you provided. The awk part is simply to format them in C-style array elements, five per line.
Just take the output of that and put it into your code and, voila, there you have it, a compile-time-expensed array that you can use for fast lookup.
It takes only a second and a half on my box to generate the array and then you never need to do it again. You also won't have to concern yourself with the vagaries of modulo math :-)
static int array[] = {
1,2,4,8,16,
32,64,128,256,512,
1024,2048,4096,8192,16384,
32768,65536,131072,262144,524288,
1048576,2097152,4194304,8388608,16777216,
33554432,67108864,134217728,268435456,536870912,
73741817,147483634,294967268,589934536,179869065,
359738130,719476260,438952513,877905026,755810045,
511620083,23240159,46480318,92960636,185921272,
371842544,743685088,487370169,974740338,949480669,
898961331,797922655,595845303,191690599,383381198,
766762396,533524785,67049563,134099126,268198252,
536396504,72793001,145586002,291172004,582344008,
164688009,329376018,658752036,317504065,635008130,
270016253,540032506,80065005,160130010,320260020,
640520040,281040073,562080146,124160285,248320570,
:
861508356,723016705,446033403,892066806,784133605,
568267203,136534399,273068798,546137596,92275185,
184550370,369100740,738201480,476402953,952805906,
905611805,
};
If you notice that your modulo can be stored in int. MOD=1000000007(decimal) is equivalent of 0b00111011100110101100101000000111 and can be stored in 32 bits.
- i pow(2,i) bit representation
- 0 1 0b00000000000000000000000000000001
- 1 2 0b00000000000000000000000000000010
- 2 4 0b00000000000000000000000000000100
- 3 8 0b00000000000000000000000000001000
- ...
- 29 536870912 0b00100000000000000000000000000000
Tricky part starts when pow(2,i) is grater than your MOD=1000000007, but if you know that current pow(2,i) will be greater than your MOD, you can actually see how bits look like after MOD
- i pow(2,i) pow(2,i)%MOD bit representation
- 30 1073741824 73741817 0b000100011001010011000000000000
- 31 2147483648 147483634 0b001000110010100110000000000000
- 32 4294967296 294967268 0b010001100101001100000000000000
- 33 8589934592 589934536 0b100011001010011000000000000000
So if you have pow(2,i-1)%MOD you can do *2 actually on pow(2,i-1)%MOD till you're next pow(2,i) will be greater than MOD.
In example for i=34 you will use (589934536*2) MOD 1000000007 instead of (8589934592*2) MOD 1000000007, because 8589934592 can't be stored in int.
Additional you can try bit operations instead of multiplication for pow(2,i).
Bit operation same as multiplication for 2 is bit shift left.
I am studying a question in the book Programming Pearls, and they recommended this function to set a bit in a bit vector. I'm a bit confused at to what it does.
#define BITSPERWORD 32
#define MASK 0x1F
#define SHIFT 5
#define N 1000000
int a[1 + N/BITSPERWORD];
void set(int i){
a[i >> SHIFT] |= (1 << (i & MASK));
}
Here is my (probably wrong) interpretation of this code.
if i = 64,
1) first, it takes i and shifts it to the right by SHIFT (which is 5) bits. This is equivalent to DIVIDING (not multiplying, as I first thought) i by 2^5. So if i is 64, the index of a is 2 (64 / 2^5)
2) a[2] |= (1 << (64 & MASK))
64 & 1 = 1000000 & 01 = 1000001.
So 1 gets left shifted how many bits????
It seems how this method works, even though I feel like there are better ways to set a bit. Is to find the index of the ith bit it essentially divides by 32 because that is the number of bits per word.
Since the operator used here is | the function is setting the bit to one not toggling the bit
0x1F is actually 31 and when anded with the i you get the remainder (not sure why they just didn't use %)
And lastly the shift takes the 1 to the proper location and or's it with the right slot in the vector.
If you are planning to use this code
you could write it a lot clear without defines and using more obvious methods of doing it, I doubt it would make a difference in speed.
Also you should probably just use std::bitset
the use of the mask to get the remainder particularly annoyed me because I'm pretty sure it would not necessarily work for every number, 31 happens to work because it's all 1's
I am learning C/C++ programming & have encountered the usage of 'Bit arrays' or 'Bit Vectors'. Am not able to understand their purpose? here are my doubts -
Are they used as boolean flags?
Can one use int arrays instead? (more memory of course, but..)
What's this concept of Bit-Masking?
If bit-masking is simple bit operations to get an appropriate flag, how do one program for them? is it not difficult to do this operation in head to see what the flag would be, as apposed to decimal numbers?
I am looking for applications, so that I can understand better. for Eg -
Q. You are given a file containing integers in the range (1 to 1 million). There are some duplicates and hence some numbers are missing. Find the fastest way of finding missing
numbers?
For the above question, I have read solutions telling me to use bit arrays. How would one store each integer in a bit?
I think you've got yourself confused between arrays and numbers, specifically what it means to manipulate binary numbers.
I'll go about this by example. Say you have a number of error messages and you want to return them in a return value from a function. Now, you might label your errors 1,2,3,4... which makes sense to your mind, but then how do you, given just one number, work out which errors have occured?
Now, try labelling the errors 1,2,4,8,16... increasing powers of two, basically. Why does this work? Well, when you work base 2 you are manipulating a number like 00000000 where each digit corresponds to a power of 2 multiplied by its position from the right. So let's say errors 1, 4 and 8 occur. Well, then that could be represented as 00001101. In reverse, the first digit = 1*2^0, the third digit 1*2^2 and the fourth digit 1*2^3. Adding them all up gives you 13.
Now, we are able to test if such an error has occured by applying a bitmask. By example, if you wanted to work out if error 8 has occured, use the bit representation of 8 = 00001000. Now, in order to extract whether or not that error has occured, use a binary and like so:
00001101
& 00001000
= 00001000
I'm sure you know how an and works or can deduce it from the above - working digit-wise, if any two digits are both 1, the result is 1, else it is 0.
Now, in C:
int func(...)
{
int retval = 0;
if ( sometestthatmeans an error )
{
retval += 1;
}
if ( sometestthatmeans an error )
{
retval += 2;
}
return retval
}
int anotherfunc(...)
{
uint8_t x = func(...)
/* binary and with 8 and shift 3 plaes to the right
* so that the resultant expression is either 1 or 0 */
if ( ( ( x & 0x08 ) >> 3 ) == 1 )
{
/* that error occurred */
}
}
Now, to practicalities. When memory was sparse and protocols didn't have the luxury of verbose xml etc, it was common to delimit a field as being so many bits wide. In that field, you assign various bits (flags, powers of 2) to a certain meaning and apply binary operations to deduce if they are set, then operate on these.
I should also add that binary operations are close in idea to the underlying electronics of a computer. Imagine if the bit fields corresponded to the output of various circuits (carrying current or not). By using enough combinations of said circuits, you make... a computer.
regarding the usage the bits array :
if you know there are "only" 1 million numbers - you use an array of 1 million bits. in the beginning all bits will be zero and every time you read a number - use this number as index and change the bit in this index to be one (if it's not one already).
after reading all numbers - the missing numbers are the indices of the zeros in the array.
for example, if we had only numbers between 0 - 4 the array would look like this in the beginning: 0 0 0 0 0.
if we read the numbers : 3, 2, 2
the array would look like this: read 3 --> 0 0 0 1 0. read 3 (again) --> 0 0 0 1 0. read 2 --> 0 0 1 1 0. check the indices of the zeroes: 0,1,4 - those are the missing numbers
BTW, of course you can use integers instead of bits but it may take (depends on the system) 32 times memory
Sivan
Bit Arrays or Bit Vectors can be though as an array of boolean values. Normally a boolean variable needs at least one byte storage, but in a bit array/vector only one bit is needed.
This gets handy if you have lots of such data so you save memory at large.
Another usage is if you have numbers which do not exactly fit in standard variables which are 8,16,32 or 64 bit in size. You could this way store into a bit vector of 16 bit a number which consists of 4 bit, one that is 2 bit and one that is 10 bits in size. Normally you would have to use 3 variables with sizes of 8,8 and 16 bit, so you only have 50% of storage wasted.
But all these uses are very rarely used in business aplications, the come to use often when interfacing drivers through pinvoke/interop functions and doing low level programming.
Bit Arrays of Bit Vectors are used as a mapping from position to some bit value. Yes it's basically the same thing as an array of Bool, but typical Bool implementation is one to four bytes long and it uses too much space.
We can store the same amount of data much more efficiently by using arrays of words and binary masking operations and shifts to store and retrieve them (less overall memory used, less accesses to memory, less cache miss, less memory page swap). The code to access individual bits is still quite straightforward.
There is also some bit field support builtin in C language (you write things like int i:1; to say "only consume one bit") , but it is not available for arrays and you have less control of the overall result (details of implementation depends on compiler and alignment issues).
Below is a possible way to answer to your "search missing numbers" question. I fixed int size to 32 bits to keep things simple, but it could be written using sizeof(int) to make it portable. And (depending on the compiler and target processor) the code could only be made faster using >> 5 instead of / 32 and & 31 instead of % 32, but that is just to give the idea.
#include <stdio.h>
#include <errno.h>
#include <stdint.h>
int main(){
/* put all numbers from 1 to 1000000 in a file, except 765 and 777777 */
{
printf("writing test file\n");
int x = 0;
FILE * f = fopen("testfile.txt", "w");
for (x=0; x < 1000000; ++x){
if (x == 765 || x == 777760 || x == 777791){
continue;
}
fprintf(f, "%d\n", x);
}
fprintf(f, "%d\n", 57768); /* this one is a duplicate */
fclose(f);
}
uint32_t bitarray[1000000 / 32];
/* read file containing integers in the range [1,1000000] */
/* any non number is considered as separator */
/* the goal is to find missing numbers */
printf("Reading test file\n");
{
unsigned int x = 0;
FILE * f = fopen("testfile.txt", "r");
while (1 == fscanf(f, " %u",&x)){
bitarray[x / 32] |= 1 << (x % 32);
}
fclose(f);
}
/* find missing number in bitarray */
{
int x = 0;
for (x=0; x < (1000000 / 32) ; ++x){
int n = bitarray[x];
if (n != (uint32_t)-1){
printf("Missing number(s) between %d and %d [%x]\n",
x * 32, (x+1) * 32, bitarray[x]);
int b;
for (b = 0 ; b < 32 ; ++b){
if (0 == (n & (1 << b))){
printf("missing number is %d\n", x*32+b);
}
}
}
}
}
}
That is used for bit flags storage, as well as for parsing different binary protocols fields, where 1 byte is divided into a number of bit-fields. This is widely used, in protocols like TCP/IP, up to ASN.1 encodings, OpenPGP packets, and so on.