Search Results

Search found 1100 results on 44 pages for 'bitwise operators'.

Page 2/44 | < Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >

  • PHP bitwise left shifting 32 spaces problem and bad results with large numbers arithmetic operations

    - by Victor Stanciu
    Hello, I have the following problems: First: I am trying to do a 32-spaces bitwise left shift on a large number, and for some reason the number is always returned as-is. For example: echo(516103988<<32); // echoes 516103988 Because shifting the bits to the left one space is the equivalent of multiplying by 2, i tried multiplying the number by 2^32, and it works, it returns 2216649749795176448. Second: I have to add 9379 to the number from the above point: printf('%0.0f', 2216649749795176448 + 9379); // prints 2216649749795185920 Should print: 2216649749795185827

    Read the article

  • Algorithm for bitwise fiddling

    - by EquinoX
    If I have a 32-bit binary number and I want to replace the lower 16-bit of the binary number with a 16-bit number that I have and keep the upper 16-bit of that number to produce a new binary number.. how can I do this using simple bitwise operator? For example the 32-bit binary number is: 1010 0000 1011 1111 0100 1000 1010 1001 and the lower 16-bit I have is: 0000 0000 0000 0001 so the result is: 1010 0000 1011 1111 0000 0000 0000 0001 how can I do this?

    Read the article

  • Python operators returning ints

    - by None
    Is there any way to have Python operators line "==" and "" return ints instead of bools. I know that I could use the int function (int(1 == 1)) or add 0 ((1 == 1) + 0) but I was wondering if there was an easy way to do it. Like when you want division to return floats you could type from __future__ import division. Is there any way to do this with operators returning ints? Or could I make a class extending __future__._Feature that would do what I want?

    Read the article

  • Understanding evaluation of expressions containing '++' and '->' operators in C.

    - by Leif Ericson
    Consider this example: struct { int num; } s, *ps; s.num = 0; ps = &s; ++ps->num; printf("%d", s.num); /* Prints 1 */ It prints 1. So I understand that it is because according to operators precedence, -> is higher than ++, so the value ps->num (which is 0) is firstly fetched and then the ++ operator operates on it, so it increments it to 1. struct { int num; } s, *ps; s.num = 0; ps = &s; ps++->num; printf("%d", s.num); /* Prints 0 */ In this example I get 0 and I don't understand why; the explanation of the first example should be the same for this example. But it seems that this expression is evaluated as follows: At first, the operator ++ operates, and it operates on ps, so it increments it to the next struct. Only then -> operates and it does nothing because it just fetches the num field of the next struct and does nothing with it. But it contradicts the precedence of operators, which says that -> have higher precedence than ++. Can someone explain this behavior? Edit: After reading two answers which refer to a C++ precedence tables which indicate that a prefix ++/-- operators have lower precedence than ->, I did some googling and came up with this link that states that this rule applies also to C itself. It fits exactly and fully explains this behavior, but I must add that the table in this link contradicts a table in my own copy of K&R ANSI C. So if you have suggestions as to which source is correct I would like to know. Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Inherited varibles are not reading correctly when using bitwise comparisons

    - by Shawn B
    Hey, I have a few classes set up for a game, with XMapObject as the base, and XEntity, XEnviron, and XItem inheriting it. MapObjects have a number of flags, one of them being MAPOBJECT_SOLID. My problem is, that XEntity is the only class that correctly detects MAPOBJECT_SOLID. Both Items are Environs are always considered solid by the game, regardless of the flag's state. What is important, is that Environs and Item should almost never be solid. Here are the relevent code samples: XMapObject: class XMapObject : public XObject { public: Uint8 MapObjectType,Location[2],MapObjectFlags; XMapObject *NextMapObject,*PrevMapObject; XMapObject(); void CreateMapObject(Uint8 MapObjectType); void SpawnMapObject(Uint8 MapObjectLocation[2]); void RemoveMapObject(); void DeleteMapObject(); void MapObjectSetLocation(Uint8 Y,Uint8 X); void MapObjectMapLink(); void MapObjectMapUnlink(); }; XEntity: class XEntity : public XMapObject { public: Uint8 Health,EntityFlags; float Speed,Time; XEntity *NextEntity,*PrevEntity; XItem *IventoryList; XEntity(); void CreateEntity(Uint8 EntityType,Uint8 EntityLocation[2]); void DeleteEntity(); void EntityLink(); void EntityUnlink(); Uint8 MoveEntity(Uint8 YOffset,Uint8 XOffset); }; XEnviron: class XEnviron : public XMapObject { public: Uint8 Effect,TimeOut; void CreateEnviron(Uint8 Type,Uint8 Y,Uint8 X,Uint8 TimeOut); }; XItem: class XItem : public XMapObject { public: void CreateItem(Uint8 Type,Uint8 Y,Uint8 X); }; And lastly, the entity move code. Only entities are capable of moving themselves. Uint8 XEntity::MoveEntity(Uint8 YOffset,Uint8 XOffset) { Uint8 NewY = Location[0] + YOffset, NewX = Location[1] + XOffset; if((NewY >= 0 && NewY < MAPY) && (NewX >= 0 && NewX < MAPX)) { XTile *Tile = GetTile(NewY,NewX); if(Tile->MapList != NULL) { XMapObject *MapObject = Tile->MapList; while(MapObject != NULL) { if(MapObject->MapObjectFlags & MAPOBJECT_SOLID) { printf("solid\n"); return 0; } MapObject = MapObject->NextMapObject; } } if(Tile->Flags & TILE_SOLID && EntityFlags & ENTITY_CLIPPING) { return 0; } this->MapObjectSetLocation(NewY,NewX); return 1; } return 0; } What is wierd, is that the bitwise operator always returns true when the MapObject is an Environ or an Item, but it works correctly for Entities. For debug I am using the printf "Solid", and also a printf containing the value of the flag for both Environs and Items. Any help is greatly appreciated, as this is a major bug for the small game I am working on.

    Read the article

  • Inherited variables are not reading correctly when using bitwise comparisons

    - by Shawn B
    Hey, I have a few classes set up for a game, with XMapObject as the base, and XEntity, XEnviron, and XItem inheriting it. MapObjects have a number of flags, one of them being MAPOBJECT_SOLID. My problem is that XEntity is the only class that correctly detects MAPOBJECT_SOLID. Both Items are Environs are always considered solid by the game, regardless of the flag's state. What is important is that Environs and Item should almost never be solid. Here are the relevent code samples: XMapObject: class XMapObject : public XObject { public: Uint8 MapObjectType,Location[2],MapObjectFlags; XMapObject *NextMapObject,*PrevMapObject; XMapObject(); void CreateMapObject(Uint8 MapObjectType); void SpawnMapObject(Uint8 MapObjectLocation[2]); void RemoveMapObject(); void DeleteMapObject(); void MapObjectSetLocation(Uint8 Y,Uint8 X); void MapObjectMapLink(); void MapObjectMapUnlink(); }; XEntity: class XEntity : public XMapObject { public: Uint8 Health,EntityFlags; float Speed,Time; XEntity *NextEntity,*PrevEntity; XItem *IventoryList; XEntity(); void CreateEntity(Uint8 EntityType,Uint8 EntityLocation[2]); void DeleteEntity(); void EntityLink(); void EntityUnlink(); Uint8 MoveEntity(Uint8 YOffset,Uint8 XOffset); }; XEnviron: class XEnviron : public XMapObject { public: Uint8 Effect,TimeOut; void CreateEnviron(Uint8 Type,Uint8 Y,Uint8 X,Uint8 TimeOut); }; XItem: class XItem : public XMapObject { public: void CreateItem(Uint8 Type,Uint8 Y,Uint8 X); }; And lastly, the entity move code. Only entities are capable of moving themselves. Uint8 XEntity::MoveEntity(Uint8 YOffset,Uint8 XOffset) { Uint8 NewY = Location[0] + YOffset, NewX = Location[1] + XOffset; if((NewY >= 0 && NewY < MAPY) && (NewX >= 0 && NewX < MAPX)) { XTile *Tile = GetTile(NewY,NewX); if(Tile->MapList != NULL) { XMapObject *MapObject = Tile->MapList; while(MapObject != NULL) { if(MapObject->MapObjectFlags & MAPOBJECT_SOLID) { printf("solid\n"); return 0; } MapObject = MapObject->NextMapObject; } } if(Tile->Flags & TILE_SOLID && EntityFlags & ENTITY_CLIPPING) { return 0; } this->MapObjectSetLocation(NewY,NewX); return 1; } return 0; } What is wierd, is that the bitwise operator always returns true when the MapObject is an Environ or an Item, but it works correctly for Entities. For debug I am using the printf "Solid", and also a printf containing the value of the flag for both Environs and Items. Any help is greatly appreciated, as this is a major bug for the small game I am working on.

    Read the article

  • What is Advanced Search Operators?

    Search engines have set up further tools referred to as advanced search operators to provide power users possibly far more control when searching. Advanced search operators are distinctive phrases which you could insert in your search query for you to come across unique sorts of details of which the common search are not able to offer. A number of of those operators provide beneficial resources for Search engines gurus and other people who want really special data, or perhaps who wish to minimize their particular search to very specific source.

    Read the article

  • Applying Advanced Search Operators

    Search engines have developed additional applications termed advanced search operators to offer power internet marketers even more control each time searching. Advanced search operators are exclusive terms which you could place as part of your search query in order to come across unique sorts of details which a common search can not offer. A number of of those operators provide valuable tools for SEO specialists as well as other people who desire rather specific details, or maybe who need to restrict their particular search to extremely distinct source.

    Read the article

  • Implementing Advanced Search Operators

    Search engines have set up additional applications identified as advanced search operators to give sophisticated users additionally more management while searching. Advanced search operators are exceptional terms that you just can put in your search item for you to locate particular sorts of info that a standard search are unable to provide. Numerous of these operators supply handy tools for Search engines gurus and some others who require rather specific details, or maybe who prefer to minimize their search to really distinct results.

    Read the article

  • Making Use of Advanced Search Operators

    Search engines have set up extra tools referred to as advanced search operators to give professional users additionally more manage when searching. Advanced search operators are unique words that you simply can insert inside your search item in order to find unique sorts of details which a common search can not supply. Numerous of those operators produce handy tools for SEO professionals as well as other people who want really special details, or perhaps who prefer to control their search to very specific results.

    Read the article

  • When to use Shift operators << >> in C# ?

    - by Junior Mayhé
    I was studying shift operators in C#, trying to find out when to use them in my code. I found an answer but for Java, you could: a) Make faster integer multiplication and division operations: *4839534 * 4* can be done like this: 4839534 << 2 or 543894 / 2 can be done like this: 543894 1 Shift operations much more faster than multiplication for most of processors. b) Reassembling byte streams to int values c) For accelerating operations with graphics since Red, Green and Blue colors coded by separate bytes. d) Packing small numbers into one single long... For b, c and d I can't imagine here a real sample. Does anyone know if we can accomplish all these items in C#? Is there more practical use for shift operators in C#?

    Read the article

  • Equality and Assigment Operators

    - by Jeremy Smith
    I have a assembly compiled in VB.NET that contains two operators: Public Shared Operator =(quarterA As CalendarQuarter, quarterB As CalendarQuarter) As Boolean Return quarterA.StartDate = quarterB.StartDate AndAlso quarterA.EndDate = quarterB.EndDate AndAlso quarterA.Quarter = quarterB.Quarter End Operator Public Shared Operator <>(quarterA As CalendarQuarter, quarterB As CalendarQuarter) As Boolean Return Not (quarterA = quarterB) End Operator However, when using the assembly in C# to perform equality checks if (qtr != null) I receive the error: Cannot implicity convert type 'object' to 'bool' My original intent with the = operator was only for assignment purposes in VB, so I may be way off base (I don't use custom operators too often). What do I need to do to make the operator behave with both equality and assignment operations?

    Read the article

  • SQL Operators as text in where clause

    - by suggy1982
    I have the following table, which is used for storing bandings. The table is maintained via a web frontend. CREATE TABLE [dbo].[Banding]( [BandingID] [int] IDENTITY(1,1) NOT NULL, [ValueLowerLimitOperator] [varchar](10) NULL, [ValueLowerLimit] [decimal](9, 2) NULL, [ValueUpperLimitOperator] [varchar](10) NULL, [ValueUpperLimit] [decimal](9, 2) NULL, [VolumeLowerLimitOperator] [varchar](10) NULL The operator fields store values such as < = <=. I want to get to a position where I can use the operators values stored in the table in a case statement in a where clause. Like this. SELECT * FROM table WHERE CASE ValueLowerLimitOperator WHEN '<' THEN VALUE < X WHEN '>' THEN VALUE > X END rather than having to write mutiple case or if statements for each permutation. Does anyone have any suggestions how I can decode the operators values stored in the table as part of my query and then use them in a case/where statement?

    Read the article

  • Bit Reversal using bitwise

    - by Yongwei Xing
    Hi all I am trying to do bit reversal in a byte. I use the code below static int BitReversal(int n) { int u0 = 0x55555555; // 01010101010101010101010101010101 int u1 = 0x33333333; // 00110011001100110011001100110011 int u2 = 0x0F0F0F0F; // 00001111000011110000111100001111 int u3 = 0x00FF00FF; // 00000000111111110000000011111111 int x, y, z; x = n; y = (x >> 1) & u0; z = (x & u0) << 1; x = y | z; y = (x >> 2) & u1; z = (x & u1) << 2; x = y | z; y = (x >> 4) & u2; z = (x & u2) << 4; x = y | z; y = (x >> 8) & u3; z = (x & u3) << 8; x = y | z; y = (x >> 16) & u4; z = (x & u4) << 16; x = y | z; return x; } It can reverser the bit (on a 32-bit machine), but there is a problem, For example, the input is 10001111101, I want to get 10111110001, but this method would reverse the whole byte including the heading 0s. The output is 10111110001000000000000000000000. Is there any method to only reverse the actual number? I do not want to convert it to string and reverser, then convert again. Is there any pure math method or bit operation method? Best Regards,

    Read the article

  • Bitwise operation on void* in C#

    - by code poet
    So I am Reflector-ing some framework 2.0 code and end up with the following deconstruction fixed (void* voidRef3 = ((void*) & _someMember)) { ... } This won't compile due to 'The right hand side of a fixed statement assignment may not be a cast expression' I understand that Reflector can only approximate and generally I can see a clear path but this is a bit outside my experience. Question: what is Reflector trying to describe to me? Update: Am also seeing the following fixed (IntPtr* ptrRef3 = ((IntPtr*) & this._someMember))

    Read the article

  • Bitwise Operations -- Arithmetic Operations..

    - by RBA
    Hi, Can you please explain the below lines, with some good examples. A left arithmetic shift by n is equivalent to multiplying by 2n (provided the value does not overflow), while a right arithmetic shift by n of a two's complement value is equivalent to dividing by 2n(2 to the power n) and rounding toward negative infinity. If the binary number is treated as ones' complement, then the same right-shift operation results in division by 2n and rounding toward zero. Thankx..

    Read the article

  • Most common C# bitwise operations

    - by steffenj
    For the life of me, I can't remember how to set, delete, toggle or test a bit in a bitfield. Either I'm unsure or I mix them up because I rarely need these. So a "bit-cheat-sheet" would be nice to have. For example: flags = flags | FlagsEnum.Bit4; // Set bit 4. or if ((flags == FlagsEnum.Bit4)) == FlagsEnum.Bit4) // Is there a less verbose way? Can you give examples of all the other common operations, preferably in C# syntax using a [Flags] enum?

    Read the article

  • How does the bitwise operator '^' work?

    - by SpawnCxy
    I'm a little confused when I see the output of following code: $x = "a"; $y = "b"; $x ^= $y; $y ^= $x; $x ^= $y; echo $x; //got b echo $y; //got a And I wonder how does the operator ^ work here?Explanations with clarity would be greatly appreciated!

    Read the article

  • Bitwise operations in BC?

    - by user355926
    $ bc BC> ibase=2 BC> 110&101 // wanna get 100 (standar_in) 8: syntax error Wikipedia informs that the ops are "|, & and ^". It may be that they work only in certain BC-types or I misread something.

    Read the article

  • How to reverse bitwise AND (&) in C ?

    - by VaioIsBorn
    For example i have an operation in C like this: ((unsigned int)ptr & 0xff000000)) The result is bf000000. What do i need at this moment is how to reverse the above i.e. determine the ptr by using the result from the operation and offcourse 0xff000000 . I am asking if there's any simple way to implement this in C, tnx.

    Read the article

  • Dynamic Comparison Operators in PHP

    - by BenTheDesigner
    Hi All Is it possible, in any way, to pass comparison operators as variables to a function? I am looking at producing some convenience functions, for example (and I know this won't work): function isAnd($var, $value, $operator = '==') { if(isset($var) && $var $operator $value) return true; } if(isAnd(1, 1, '===')) echo 'worked'; Thanks in advance.

    Read the article

  • Other ternary operators besides ternary conditional (?:)

    - by Malcolm
    The "ternary operator" expression is now almost equivalent to the ternary conditional operator: condition ? trueExpression : falseExpression; However, "ternary operator" only means that it takes three arguments. I'm just curious, are there any languages with any other built-in ternary operators besides conditional operator and which ones?

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >