I've recently been assigned to a C++ project involving information being sent between computers via UDP. When a packet arrives, I have a program which accepts the data and can display it as a raw hexadecimal string. However, I'm struggling to grasp exactly how this whole process is supposed to work. The hex string supposedly contains several fields (e.g. a 4-char array, some float_32s, and some uint_32s).
How do I translate the sections of this string into the correct variable types? The first value, an ASCII title, was simple enough; the first eight chars in the hex string are a hexadecimal representation of an ASCII word (0x45 hex can be translated directly to the capital letter E). But the next value, a 32-bit float, doesn't really make sense to me. What is the relation between the hex value "42 01 33 33" and the float value "32.3" (a given example)?
I'm a bit in over my head here, I feel I'm missing some essential information regarding the way number systems work.
All types in C have a representation (which for most types is defined by a particular implementation). Most C implementations use IEEE 754 for representing the floating types (this may actually be a requirement for C and C++, but from memory it is not). The Wikipedia article explains how the floating types are represented in memory. In most C and C++ implementations, float is a 32-bit type and double is a 64-bit type. Therefore, in these implementations float is 4 bytes wide and double is 8 bytes wide.
Be careful, because the byte order can be different. Some architectures store the floating type in little endian, some in big endian. There is also a Wikipedia article on endianness too.
To copy the bytes to the floating type, you have to make sure that the floating type is the same size as the number of bytes you have, and then you can copy the bytes one-by-one ‘into’ the floating type. Something like this will give you the gist of it:
unsigned char rep[] = { 0x42, 0x01, 0x33, 0x33 };
float someFloat;
if (sizeof(someFloat) == 4)
{
memcpy(&someFloat, rep, sizeof(someFloat));
}
else
{
// throw an exception or something
}
There are other ways of copying the bytes to the floating type, but be careful about ‘breaking the rules’ (type-punning etc.). Also, if the resulting value is incorrect, it may be because the byte order is wrong, and therefore you need to copy the bytes in reverse, so that the 4th byte in the representation is the 1st byte of the float.
If you have a hex value:
42 01 33 33
It is the equivalent of
0100 0010 0000 0001 0011 0011 0011 0011
in binary code.
Now, there is a floating point standard called IEEE 754 which tells you how to format a floating point number into binary or back.
The gist of it is that the first bit is the sign (positive/negative number), the next 8 bits are the exponent and the last 23 are the mantisse. This is how the computer internally saves floating point numbers, since it's only able to store 1's and 0's.
If you add it all together in the way the IEEE specifies you get 32.3.
The exact data format is specified by the protocol used, but the common ways to represent numeric data are:
Unsigned integer: This is actually the simplest. Its typical representation works in principle like our normal decimal system, except that the "digits" are bytes, and can have 256 different values.
If you look at a decimal number like 3127, you see the three digits. The least significant digit is the last one (the 7 in this case). Least significant means that if you change it by 1, you get the minimal change of the value (namely 1). The most significant digit in the example is the 3 at the very left: If you change that one by 1, you make the maximal change of the value, namely a change of 1000. Since there are 10 different digits (0 to 9), the number represented by "3127" is 3*10*10*10 + 1*10*10 + 2*10 + 7. Note that itz is just a convention that the most significant digit comes first; you could also define that the least significant digit comes first, and then this number would be written as "7213".
Now in most encodings, unsigned numbers work exactly the same, except that the "digits" are bytes, and therefore instead of base 10 we have base 256. Also, unlike in decimal numbers, there's no universal convention whether the most significant byte (MSB) or the least significant byte (LSB) comes first; both conventions are used in different protocols or file formats.
For example, in 4-byte (i.e. 32 bit) unsigned int with MSB first (also called big-endian encoding), the value 1000 = 0*256^3 + 0*256^2 + 3*256 + 232 would be represented by the four byte values 0, 0, 3, 232, or hex 00 00 03 E8. For little-endian encoding (LSB first), it would be E8 03 00 00 instead. And as 16 bit integer, it would be just 03 E8 (big endian) or E8 03 (little endian).
For signed integers, the most often used representation is two's complement. Basically it means that if the most significant bit is 1 (i.e. the most significant byte is 128 or larger), the byte sequence doesn't encode the number as written above, but instead the negative number you get by subtracting 2^(bits) from it, where (bits) is the number of bits in the number. For example, in a signed 16-bit int, the sequence FF FF is not 65535 as it would be in 16-bit unsigned int, but rather 65535-2^16=-1. As with unsigned ints, you have to distinguish between big-endian and little-endian. For example, -3 would be FF FD in 16-bit bit endian, but FD FF in 16-bit little endian.
Floating point is quite a bit more complicated; today usually the format specified by IEEE/IEC is used. Basically, floating point numbers are of the form sign*(1.mantissa)*2^exponent, and sign, mantissa and exponent are stored in different subfields. Again, there are little-endian and big-endian forms.
Related
I'm just curious if there's a reason why in order to represent -1 in binary, two's complement is used: flipping the bits and adding 1?
-1 is represented by 11111111 (two's complement) rather than (to me more intuitive) 10000001 which is binary 1 with first bit as negative flag.
Disclaimer: I don't rely on binary arithmetic for my job!
It's done so that addition doesn't need to have any special logic for dealing with negative numbers. Check out the article on Wikipedia.
Say you have two numbers, 2 and -1. In your "intuitive" way of representing numbers, they would be 0010 and 1001, respectively (I'm sticking to 4 bits for size). In the two's complement way, they are 0010 and 1111. Now, let's say I want to add them.
Two's complement addition is very simple. You add numbers normally and any carry bit at the end is discarded. So they're added as follows:
0010
+ 1111
=10001
= 0001 (discard the carry)
0001 is 1, which is the expected result of "2+(-1)".
But in your "intuitive" method, adding is more complicated:
0010
+ 1001
= 1011
Which is -3, right? Simple addition doesn't work in this case. You need to note that one of the numbers is negative and use a different algorithm if that's the case.
For this "intuitive" storage method, subtraction is a different operation than addition, requiring additional checks on the numbers before they can be added. Since you want the most basic operations (addition, subtraction, etc) to be as fast as possible, you need to store numbers in a way that lets you use the simplest algorithms possible.
Additionally, in the "intuitive" storage method, there are two zeroes:
0000 "zero"
1000 "negative zero"
Which are intuitively the same number but have two different values when stored. Every application will need to take extra steps to make sure that non-zero values are also not negative zero.
There's another bonus with storing ints this way, and that's when you need to extend the width of the register the value is being stored in. With two's complement, storing a 4-bit number in an 8-bit register is a matter of repeating its most significant bit:
0001 (one, in four bits)
00000001 (one, in eight bits)
1110 (negative two, in four bits)
11111110 (negative two, in eight bits)
It's just a matter of looking at the sign bit of the smaller word and repeating it until it pads the width of the bigger word.
With your method you would need to clear the existing bit, which is an extra operation in addition to padding:
0001 (one, in four bits)
00000001 (one, in eight bits)
1010 (negative two, in four bits)
10000010 (negative two, in eight bits)
You still need to set those extra 4 bits in both cases, but in the "intuitive" case you need to clear the 5th bit as well. It's one tiny extra step in one of the most fundamental and common operations present in every application.
Wikipedia says it all:
The two's-complement system has the advantage of not requiring that the addition and subtraction circuitry examine the signs of the operands to determine whether to add or subtract. This property makes the system both simpler to implement and capable of easily handling higher precision arithmetic. Also, zero has only a single representation, obviating the subtleties associated with negative zero, which exists in ones'-complement systems.
In other words, adding is the same, wether or not the number is negative.
Even though this question is old , let me put in my 2 cents.
Before I explain this ,lets get back to basics. 2' complement is 1's complement + 1 .
Now what is 1's complement and what is its significance in addition.
Sum of any n-bit number and its 1's complement gives you the highest possible number that can be represented by those n-bits.
Example:
0010 (2 in 4 bit system)
+1101 (1's complement of 2)
___________________________
1111 (the highest number that we can represent by 4 bits)
Now what will happen if we try to add 1 more to the result. It will results in an overflow.
The result will be 1 0000 which is 0 ( as we are working with 4 bit numbers , (the 1 on left is an overflow )
So ,
Any n-bit number + its 1's complement = max n-bit number
Any n-bit number + its 1'complement + 1 = 0 ( as explained above, overflow will occur as we are adding 1 to max n-bit number)
Someone then decided to call 1's complement + 1 as 2'complement. So the above statement becomes:
Any n'bit number + its 2's complement = 0
which means 2's complement of a number = - (of that number)
All this yields one more question , why can we use only the (n-1) of the n bits to represent positive number and why does the left most nth bit represent sign (0 on the leftmost bit means +ve number , and 1 means -ve number ) . eg why do we use only the first 31 bits of an int in java to represent positive number if the 32nd bit is 1 , its a -ve number.
1100 (lets assume 12 in 4 bit system)
+0100(2's complement of 12)
___________________________
1 0000 (result is zero , with the carry 1 overflowing)
Thus the system of (n + 2'complement of n) = 0 , still works. The only ambiguity here is 2's complement of 12 is 0100 which ambiguously also represents +8 , other than representing -12 in 2s complement system.
This problem will be solved if positive numbers always have a 0 in their left most bit. In that case their 2's complement will always have a 1 in their left most bit , and we wont have the ambiguity of the same set of bits representing a 2's complement number as well as a +ve number.
Two's complement allows addition and subtraction to be done in the normal way (like you wound for unsigned numbers). It also prevents -0 (a separate way to represent 0 that would not be equal to 0 with the normal bit-by-bit method of comparing numbers).
Two's complement allows negative and positive numbers to be added together without any special logic.
If you tried to add 1 and -1 using your method
10000001 (-1)
+00000001 (1)
you get
10000010 (-2)
Instead, by using two's complement, we can add
11111111 (-1)
+00000001 (1)
you get
00000000 (0)
The same is true for subtraction.
Also, if you try to subtract 4 from 6 (two positive numbers) you can 2's complement 4 and add the two together 6 + (-4) = 6 - 4 = 2
This means that subtraction and addition of both positive and negative numbers can all be done by the same circuit in the cpu.
this is to simplify sums and differences of numbers. a sum of a negative number and a positive one codified in 2's complements is the same as summing them up in the normal way.
The usual implementation of the operation is "flip the bits and add 1", but there's another way of defining it that probably makes the rationale clearer. 2's complement is the form you get if you take the usual unsigned representation where each bit controls the next power of 2, and just make the most significant term negative.
Taking an 8-bit value a7 a6 a5 a4 a3 a2 a1 a0
The usual unsigned binary interpretation is:
27*a7 + 26*a6 + 25*a5 + 24*a4 + 23*a3 + 22*a2 + 21*a1 + 20*a0
11111111 = 128 + 64 + 32 + 16 + 8 + 4 + 2 + 1 = 255
The two's complement interpretation is:
-27*a7 + 26*a6 + 25*a5 + 24*a4 + 23*a3 + 22*a2 + 21*a1 + 20*a0
11111111 = -128 + 64 + 32 + 16 + 8 + 4 + 2 + 1 = -1
None of the other bits change meaning at all, and carrying into a7 is "overflow" and not expected to work, so pretty much all of the arithmetic operations work without modification (as others have noted). Sign-magnitude generally inspect the sign bit and use different logic.
To expand on others answers:
In two's complement
Adding is the same mechanism as plain positive integers adding.
Subtracting doesn't change too
Multiplication too!
Division does require a different mechanism.
All these are true because two's complement is just normal modular arithmetic, where we choose to look at some numbers as negative by subtracting the modulo.
Reading the answers to this question, I came across this comment [edited].
2's complement of 0100(4) will be 1100. Now 1100 is 12 if I say normally. So,
when I say normal 1100 then it is 12, but when I say 2's complement 1100 then
it is -4? Also, in Java when 1100 (lets assume 4 bits for now) is stored then
how it is determined if it is +12 or -4 ?? – hagrawal Jul 2 at 16:53
In my opinion, the question asked in this comment is quite interesting and so I'd like first of all to rephrase it and then to provide an answer and an example.
QUESTION – How can the system establish how one or more adjacent bytes have to be interpreted? In particular, how can the system establish whether a given sequence of bytes is a plain binary number or a 2's complement number?
ANSWER – The system establishes how to interpret a sequence of bytes through types.
Types define
how many bytes have to be considered
how those bytes have to be interpreted
EXAMPLE – Below we assume that
char's are 1 byte long
short's are 2 bytes long
int's and float's are 4 bytes long
Please note that these sizes are specific to my system. Although pretty common, they can be different from system to system. If you're curious of what they are on your system, use the sizeof operator.
First of all we define an array containing 4 bytes and initialize all of them to the binary number 10111101, corresponding to the hexadecimal number BD.
// BD(hexadecimal) = 10111101 (binary)
unsigned char l_Just4Bytes[ 4 ] = { 0xBD, 0xBD, 0xBD, 0xBD };
Then we read the array content using different types.
unsigned char and signed char
// 10111101 as a PLAIN BINARY number equals 189
printf( "l_Just4Bytes as unsigned char -> %hi\n", *( ( unsigned char* )l_Just4Bytes ) );
// 10111101 as a 2'S COMPLEMENT number equals -67
printf( "l_Just4Bytes as signed char -> %i\n", *( ( signed char* )l_Just4Bytes ) );
unsigned short and short
// 1011110110111101 as a PLAIN BINARY number equals 48573
printf( "l_Just4Bytes as unsigned short -> %hu\n", *( ( unsigned short* )l_Just4Bytes ) );
// 1011110110111101 as a 2'S COMPLEMENT number equals -16963
printf( "l_Just4Bytes as short -> %hi\n", *( ( short* )l_Just4Bytes ) );
unsigned int, int and float
// 10111101101111011011110110111101 as a PLAIN BINARY number equals 3183328701
printf( "l_Just4Bytes as unsigned int -> %u\n", *( ( unsigned int* )l_Just4Bytes ) );
// 10111101101111011011110110111101 as a 2'S COMPLEMENT number equals -1111638595
printf( "l_Just4Bytes as int -> %i\n", *( ( int* )l_Just4Bytes ) );
// 10111101101111011011110110111101 as a IEEE 754 SINGLE-PRECISION number equals -0.092647
printf( "l_Just4Bytes as float -> %f\n", *( ( float* )l_Just4Bytes ) );
The 4 bytes in RAM (l_Just4Bytes[ 0..3 ]) always remain exactly the same. The only thing that changes is how we interpret them.
Again, we tell the system how to interpret them through types.
For instance, above we have used the following types to interpret the contents of the l_Just4Bytes array
unsigned char: 1 byte in plain binary
signed char: 1 byte in 2's complement
unsigned short: 2 bytes in plain binary notation
short: 2 bytes in 2's complement
unsigned int: 4 bytes in plain binary notation
int: 4 bytes in 2's complement
float: 4 bytes in IEEE 754 single-precision notation
[EDIT] This post has been edited after the comment by user4581301. Thank you for taking the time to drop those few helpful lines!
Two's complement is used because it is simpler to implement in circuitry and also does not allow a negative zero.
If there are x bits, two's complement will range from +(2^x/2+1) to -(2^x/2). One's complement will run from +(2^x/2) to -(2^x/2), but will permit a negative zero (0000 is equal to 1000 in a 4 bit 1's complement system).
It's worthwhile to note that on some early adding machines, before the days of digital computers, subtraction would be performed by having the operator enter values using a different colored set of legends on each key (so each key would enter nine minus the number to be subtracted), and press a special button would would assume a carry into a calculation. Thus, on a six-digit machine, to subtract 1234 from a value, the operator would hit keys that would normally indicate "998,765" and hit a button to add that value plus one to the calculation in progress. Two's complement arithmetic is simply the binary equivalent of that earlier "ten's-complement" arithmetic.
The advantage of performing subtraction by the complement method is reduction in the hardware
complexity.The are no need of the different digital circuit for addition and subtraction.both
addition and subtraction are performed by adder only.
I have a slight addendum that is important in some situations: two's compliment is the only representation that is possible given these constraints:
Unsigned numbers and two's compliment are commutative rings with identity. There is a homomorphism between them.
They share the same representation, with a different branch cut for negative numbers, (hence, why addition and multiplication are the same between them.)
The high bit determines the sign.
To see why, it helps to reduce the cardinality; for example, Z_4.
Sign and magnitude and ones' compliment both do not form a ring with the same number of elements; a symptom is the double zero. It is therefore difficult to work with on the edges; to be mathematically consistent, they require checking for overflow or trap representations.
Well, your intent is not really to reverse all bits of your binary number. It is actually to subtract each its digit from 1. It's just a fortunate coincidence that subtracting 1 from 1 results in 0 and subtracting 0 from 1 results in 1. So flipping bits is effectively carrying out this subtraction.
But why are you finding each digit's difference from 1? Well, you're not. Your actual intent is to compute the given binary number's difference from another binary number which has the same number of digits but contains only 1's. For example if your number is 10110001, when you flip all those bits, you're effectively computing (11111111 - 10110001).
This explains the first step in the computation of Two's Complement. Now let's include the second step -- adding 1 -- also in the picture.
Add 1 to the above binary equation:
11111111 - 10110001 + 1
What do you get? This:
100000000 - 10110001
This is the final equation. And by carrying out those two steps you're trying to find this, final difference: the binary number subtracted from another binary number with one extra digit and containing zeros except at the most signification bit position.
But why are we hankerin' after this difference really? Well, from here on, I guess it would be better if you read the Wikipedia article.
We perform only addition operation for both addition and subtraction. We add the second operand to the first operand for addition. For subtraction we add the 2's complement of the second operand to the first operand.
With a 2's complement representation we do not need separate digital components for subtraction—only adders and complementers are used.
A major advantage of two's-complement representation which hasn't yet been mentioned here is that the lower bits of a two's-complement sum, difference, or product are dependent only upon the corresponding bits of the operands. The reason that the 8 bit signed value for -1 is 11111111 is that subtracting any integer whose lowest 8 bits are 00000001 from any other integer whose lowest 8 bits are 0000000 will yield an integer whose lowest 8 bits are 11111111. Mathematically, the value -1 would be an infinite string of 1's, but all values within the range of a particular integer type will either be all 1's or all 0's past a certain point, so it's convenient for computers to "sign-extend" the most significant bit of a number as though it represented an infinite number of 1's or 0's.
Two's-complement is just about the only signed-number representation that works well when dealing with types larger than a binary machine's natural word size, since when performing addition or subtraction, code can fetch the lowest chunk of each operand, compute the lowest chunk of the result, and store that, then load the next chunk of each operand, compute the next chunk of the result, and store that, etc. Thus, even a processor which requires all additions and subtractions to go through a single 8-bit register can handle 32-bit signed numbers reasonably efficiently (slower than with a 32-bit register, of course, but still workable).
When using of the any other signed representations allowed by the C Standard, every bit of the result could potentially be affected by any bit of the operands, making it necessary to either hold an entire value in registers at once or else follow computations with an extra step that would, in at least some cases, require reading, modifying, and rewriting each chunk of the result.
There are different types of representations those are:
unsigned number representation
signed number representation
one's complement representation
Two's complement representation
-Unsigned number representation used to represent only positive numbers
-Signed number representation used to represent positive as well as a negative number. In Signed number representation MSB bit represents sign bit and rest bits represents the number. When MSB is 0 means number is positive and When MSB is 1 means number is negative.
Problem with Signed number representation is that there are two values for 0.
Problem with one's complement representation is that there are two values for 0.
But if we use Two's complement representation then there will only one value for 0 that's why we represent negative numbers in two's complement form.
Source:Why negative numbers are stored in two's complement form bytesofgigabytes
One satisfactory answer of why Two2's Complement is used to represent negative numbers rather than One's Complement system is that
Two's Complement system solves the problem of multiple representations of 0 and the need for end-around-carry which exist in the One's complement system of representing negative numbers.
For more information Visit https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Signed_number_representations
For End-around-carry Visit
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/End-around_carry
I'm using Java, for this.
I have the code 97 which represents the 'a' character is ascii. I convert 97 to binary which gives me 1100001 (7 bits) I want to convert this to 12 bits, I can add leading 0's to the existing 7 bits until it reaches 12 bits, but this seems inefficient. I've been thinking of using the & bit wise operator to make zeros all but the lowest bits of 97 to reach 12 bits, is this possible and how can I do it?
byte buffer = (byte) (code & 0xff);
Above line of code will give me 01100001 no?
which gives me 1100001 (7 bits)
Your value buffer is 8 bits. Because that's what a byte is: 8 bits.
If code has type int (detail added in comment below) it is already a 32-bit number with, in this case, 25 leading zero bits. You need do nothing with it. It's got all the bits you're asking for.
There is no Java integral type with 12 bits, nor is one directly achievable, since 12 is not a multiple of the byte size. It's unclear why you want exactly 12 bits. What harm do you think an extra 20 zero bits will do?
The important fact is that in Java, integral types (char, byte, int, etc.) have a fixed number of bits, defined by the language specification.
With reference to your original code & 0xff - code has 32 bits. In general these bits could have any value.
In your particular case, you told us that code was 97, and therefore we know the top 25 bits of code were zero; this follows from the binary representation of 97.
Again in general, & 0xff would set all but the low 8 bits to zero. In your case, that had no actual effect because they were already zero. No bits are "added" - they are always there.
I'm trying to read some bytes from a file.
This is what I've done:
struct HeaderData {
char format[2];
char n_trks[2];
char division[2];
};
HeaderData* header = new HeaderData;
Then, to get the data directly from the file to header I do
file.read(reinterpret_cast<char*>(header), sizeof(HeaderData))
If the first two bytes are00 06, header->format[0] will be 00 and header->format[1] 06. This two numbers combined represent the number 0x0006 which is 6 in decimal, which is the desired value.
When I do something like
*reinterpret_cast<unsigned*>(header->format) // In this case, the result is 0x0600
it erroneously returns the number 0x0600, so it seems that it inverts the reading of bytes.
My question is what is some workaround to correctly read the numbers as unsigned.
This is going to be an endianness mismatch.
When you read in from the file in that fashion, the bytes will be placed into your structure in the exact order they were in the file in.
When you read from the structure with an unsigned, the processor will interpret those bytes in whatever order the architecture requires it to do (most are hardcoded but some can be set to either order).
Or to put it another way
This two numbers combined represent the number 0x0006 which is 6 in decimal.
That's not necessarily remotely true. It's perfectly permissible for the processor of your choice to represent 6 in decimal as 0x06 0x00, this would be the little-endian scheme which is used on very common processors like x86. Representing it as 0x00 0x06 would be big-endian.
As M.M has stated in his comment, if your format explicitly defines the integer to be little-endian, you should explicitly read it as little-endian, e.g. format[0] + format[1] * 256, or if it is defined to be big-endian, you should read it as format[0] * 256 + format[1]. Don't rely on the processor's endianness happening to match the endianness of the data.
I have tried searching around but have not been able to find much about binary literals and endianness. Are binary literals little-endian, big-endian or something else (such as matching the target platform)?
As an example, what is the decimal value of 0b0111? Is it 7? Platform specific? Something else? Edit: I picked a bad value of 7 since it is represented within one byte. The question has been sufficiently answered despite this fact.
Some background: Basically I'm trying to figure out what the value of the least significant bits are, and masking it with binary literals seemed like a good way to go... but only if there is some guarantee about endianness.
Short answer: there isn't one. Write the number the way you would write it on paper.
Long answer:
Endianness is never exposed directly in the code unless you really try to get it out (such as using pointer tricks). 0b0111 is 7, it's the same rules as hex, writing
int i = 0xAA77;
doesn't mean 0x77AA on some platforms because that would be absurd. Where would the extra 0s that are missing go anyway with 32-bit ints? Would they get padded on the front, then the whole thing flipped to 0x77AA0000, or would they get added after? I have no idea what someone would expect if that were the case.
The point is that C++ doesn't make any assumptions about the endianness of the machine*, if you write code using primitives and the literals it provides, the behavior will be the same from machine to machine (unless you start circumventing the type system, which you may need to do).
To address your update: the number will be the way you write it out. The bits will not be reordered or any such thing, the most significant bit is on the left and the least significant bit is on the right.
There seems to be a misunderstanding here about what endianness is. Endianness refers to how bytes are ordered in memory and how they must be interpretted. If I gave you the number "4172" and said "if this is four-thousand one-hundred seventy-two, what is the endianness" you can't really give an answer because the question doesn't make sense. (some argue that the largest digit on the left means big endian, but without memory addresses the question of endianness is not answerable or relevant). This is just a number, there are no bytes to interpret, there are no memory addresses. Assuming 4 byte integer representation, the bytes that correspond to it are:
low address ----> high address
Big endian: 00 00 10 4c
Little endian: 4c 10 00 00
so, given either of those and told "this is the computer's internal representation of 4172" you could determine if its little or big endian.
So now consider your binary literal 0b0111 these 4 bits represent one nybble, and can be stored as either
low ---> high
Big endian: 00 00 00 07
Little endian: 07 00 00 00
But you don't have to care because this is also handled by the hardware, the language dictates that the compiler reads from left to right, most significant bit to least significant bit
Endianness is not about individual bits. Given that a byte is 8 bits, if I hand you 0b00000111 and say "is this little or big endian?" again you can't say because you only have one byte (and no addresses). Endianness doesn't pertain to the order of bits in a byte, it refers to the ordering of entire bytes with respect to address(unless of course you have one-bit bytes).
You don't have to care about what your computer is using internally. 0b0111 just saves you the time from having to write stuff like
unsigned int mask = 7; // only keep the lowest 3 bits
by writing
unsigned int mask = 0b0111;
Without needing to comment explaining the significance of the number.
* In c++20 you can check the endianness using std::endian.
All integer literals, including binary ones are interpreted in the same way as we normally read numbers (left most digit being most significant).
The C++ standard guarantees the same interpretation of literals without having to be concerned with the specific environment you're on. Thus, you don't have to concern yourself with endianness in this context.
Your example of 0b0111 is always equal to seven.
The C++ standard doesn't use terms of endianness in regards to number literals. Rather, it simply describes that literals have a consistent interpretation, and that the interpretation is the one you would expect.
C++ Standard - Integer Literals - 2.14.2 - paragraph 1
An integer literal is a sequence of digits that has no period or
exponent part, with optional separating single quotes that are ignored
when determining its value. An integer literal may have a prefix that
specifies its base and a suffix that specifies its type. The lexically
first digit of the sequence of digits is the most significant. A
binary integer literal (base two) begins with 0b or 0B and consists of
a sequence of binary digits. An octal integer literal (base eight)
begins with the digit 0 and consists of a sequence of octal digits.
A decimal integer literal (base ten) begins with a digit other than 0
and consists of a sequence of decimal digits. A hexadecimal integer
literal (base sixteen) begins with 0x or 0X and consists of a sequence
of hexadecimal digits, which include the decimal digits and the
letters a through f and A through F with decimal values ten through
fifteen. [Example: The number twelve can be written 12, 014, 0XC, or
0b1100. The literals 1048576, 1’048’576, 0X100000, 0x10’0000, and
0’004’000’000 all have the same value. — end example ]
Wikipedia describes what endianness is, and uses our number system as an example to understand big-endian.
The terms endian and endianness refer to the convention used to
interpret the bytes making up a data word when those bytes are stored
in computer memory.
Big-endian systems store the most significant byte of a word in the
smallest address and the least significant byte is stored in the
largest address (also see Most significant bit). Little-endian
systems, in contrast, store the least significant byte in the smallest
address.
An example on endianness is to think of how a decimal number is
written and read in place-value notation. Assuming a writing system
where numbers are written left to right, the leftmost position is
analogous to the smallest address of memory used, and rightmost
position the largest. For example, the number one hundred twenty three
is written 1 2 3, with the hundreds place left-most. Anyone who reads
this number also knows that the leftmost digit has the biggest place
value. This is an example of a big-endian convention followed in daily
life.
In this context, we are considering a digit of an integer literal to be a "byte of a word", and the word to be the literal itself. Also, the left-most character in a literal is considered to have the smallest address.
With the literal 1234, the digits one, two, three and four are the "bytes of a word", and 1234 is the "word". With the binary literal 0b0111, the digits zero, one, one and one are the "bytes of a word", and the word is 0111.
This consideration allows us to understand endianness in the context of the C++ language, and shows that integer literals are similar to "big-endian".
You're missing the distinction between endianness as written in the source code and endianness as represented in the object code. The answer for each is unsurprising: source-code literals are bigendian because that's how humans read them, in object code they're written however the target reads them.
Since a byte is by definition the smallest unit of memory access I don't believe it would be possible to even ascribe an endianness to any internal representation of bits in a byte -- the only way to discover endianness for larger numbers (whether intentionally or by surprise) is by accessing them from storage piecewise, and the byte is by definition the smallest accessible storage unit.
The C/C++ languages don't care about endianness of multi-byte integers. C/C++ compilers do. Compilers parse your source code and generate machine code for the specific target platform. The compiler, in general, stores integer literals the same way it stores an integer; such that the target CPU's instructions will directly support reading and writing them in memory.
The compiler takes care of the differences between target platforms so you don't have to.
The only time you need to worry about endianness is when you are sharing binary values with other systems that have different byte ordering.Then you would read the binary data in, byte by byte, and arrange the bytes in memory in the correct order for the system that your code is running on.
One picture is sometimes more than thousand words.
Endianness is implementation-defined. The standard guarantees that every object has an object representation as an array of char and unsigned char, which you can work with by calling memcpy() or memcmp(). In C++17, it is legal to reinterpret_cast a pointer or reference to any object type (not a pointer to void, pointer to a function, or nullptr) to a pointer to char, unsigned char, or std::byte, which are valid aliases for any object type.
What people mean when they talk about “endianness” is the order of bytes in that object representation. For example, if you declare unsigned char int_bytes[sizeof(int)] = {1}; and int i; then memcpy( &i, int_bytes, sizeof(i)); do you get 0x01, 0x01000000, 0x0100, 0x0100000000000000, or something else? The answer is: yes. There are real-world implementations that produce each of these results, and they all conform to the standard. The reason for this is so the compiler can use the native format of the CPU.
This comes up most often when a program needs to send or receive data over the Internet, where all the standards define that data should be transmitted in big-endian order, on a little-endian CPU like the x86. Some network libraries therefore specify whether particular arguments and fields of structures should be stored in host or network byte order.
The language lets you shoot yourself in the foot by twiddling the bits of an object representation arbitrarily, but it might get you a trap representation, which could cause undefined behavior if you try to use it later. (This could mean, for example, rewriting a virtual function table to inject arbitrary code.) The <type_traits> header has several templates to test whether it is safe to do things with an object representation. You can copy one object over another of the same type with memcpy( &dest, &src, sizeof(dest) ) if that type is_trivially_copyable. You can make a copy to correctly-aligned uninitialized memory if it is_trivially_move_constructible. You can test whether two objects of the same type are identical with memcmp( &a, &b, sizeof(a) ) and correctly hash an object by applying a hash function to the bytes in its object representation if the type has_unique_object_representations. An integral type has no trap representations, and so on. For the most part, though, if you’re doing operations on object representations where endianness matters, you’re telling the compiler to assume you know what you’re doing and your code will not be portable.
As others have mentioned, binary literals are written with the most-significant-digit first, like decimal, octal or hexidecimal literals. This is different from endianness and will not affect whether you need to call ntohs() on the port number from a TCP header read in from the Internet.
You might want to think about C or C++ or any other language as being intrinsically little endian (think about how the bitwise operators work). If the underlying HW is big endian, the compiler ensures that the data is stored in big endian (ditto for other endianness) however your bit wise operations work as if the data is little endian. Thing to remember is that as far as the language is concerned, data is in little endian. Endianness related problems arise when you cast the data from one type to the other. As long as you don't do that you are good.
I was questioned about the statement "C/C++ language as being intrinsically little endian", as such I am providing an example which many knows how it works but well here I go.
typedef union
{
struct {
int a:1;
int reserved:31;
} bits;
unsigned int value;
} u;
u test;
test.bits.a = 1;
test.bits.reserved = 0;
printf("After bits assignment, test.value = 0x%08X\n", test.value);
test.value = 0x00000001;
printf("After value assignment, test.value = 0x%08X\n", test.value);
Output on a little endian system:
After bits assignment, test.value = 0x00000001
After value assignment, test.value = 0x00000001
Output on a big endian system:
After bits assignment, test.value = 0x80000000
After value assignment, test.value = 0x00000001
So, if you do not know the processor's endianness, where does everything come out right? in the little endian system! Thus, I say that the C/C++ language is intrinsically little endian.
I'm finding it hard to understand fixed-point representations. When I have unsigned type of data (C++) and I want to work with that number as if it is fixed-point, I need do do certain amount of bit manipulation which aren't clear to me.
So let's say I want that my number which is unsigned and can be max 255 (8 bit number) be represented in U4.4 or U12.8 or S13.8 or whichever notation (U - unsigned, S - signed, and it comes in question when my number is int). Basically I'm expanding (or I hope that I'm) the number, working on it, and then returning it to the previous state.
How do I do that?
Can someone share link where I can find something closely related to this subject. I was looking for three hours and all I have found are general explanations on fixed-point arithmetics, nothing very practical.
Thanks
It's telling you how many bits are used for each side of the decimal point.
Take a simple example. 2 bytes, 16 bits.
That can easily be U8.8. That is, the top byte is the "integer" part, and the low byte in the "fraction" part.
So, let's make this a bit easier as an explanation.
Consider binary coded decimal. That's where you encode decimal numbers in to nibbles of bytes, each byte is 2 digits. Each nibble is a decimal digit, so 1001 0010 is "92". With two bytes, 1001 0010 0100 0111 is 9287.
So, you can see how, with no fractions, 16 bits can represent 0000 to 9999. Using you notation, that could be U16.0.
Now, you can see if we logically put the decimal point in the middle, now we can have 00.00 to 99.99, or U8.8.
The underlying bit pattern is the same, it's all a matter where you logically put the decimal point.
Now, in this example, you saw the decimal point between decimal digits.
If you're using a binary representation, then the "decimal" point is between binary digits.
So, U8.8 us 11111111. 11111111, a U12.4 is 11111111 1111.1111.
The S vs U tells you about the Sign bit. So, instead of U8.8 you'd have S7.8 S1111111. 11111111.
When you have numbers that are represented similarly, then it's just binary math upon then, just like any other number (like an integer). It's when you convert the number to ascii, or combine then with other representations that you need to shift about.
For example. To add a U8.8 to a U12.4, you need to convert the U8.8 to U12.4 before performing your math.
So, 11111111. 11111111 would just need to be shifted right 4 places to become 00001111 1111.1111. Then you can work on the two 12.4 numbers like normal. You'll notice that you lose precision of the 8.8 number during the conversion. This is known as "tough luck". You could also elevate both numbers to a higher representation, there's all sorts of options.