Sign in to follow this  

Signed to unsigned

This topic is 4378 days old which is more than the 365 day threshold we allow for new replies. Please post a new topic.

If you intended to correct an error in the post then please contact us.

Recommended Posts

In order to be able to use an API function, I need to convert a signed integer into an unsigned integer, under some constraints. Only these constraints need to be verified, the conversion is not require to conserve the actual values, only the order between them. The function is of type : unsigned long F( signed long ) and verifies that: ∀i, ∀j assert( (i > j) == (F(j) > F(i)) ); I can safely assume that long is 32 bits on the platform I am targeting. Please ask any additional necessary questions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Assuming you want a signed compare:

unsigned long F( signed long x ) {
return (x & 0x80000000) ? (static_cast<unsigned long>(x) & ~0x80000000) << 16 : static_cast<unsigned long>(x) >> 16;
}



The above will result in negative values falling into the range of [0,2^16-1] (preserving their order) and [2^16, 2^32-1] for positive values.
I could be mistaken, though - already had a beer or two [smile].
The idea, however, should work - mask out the sign bit and make two ranges for positive and negative values (possibly evenly distributes if the input is evenly distributed across the whole signed range).

[edit]
Looks as if I already had too much beer - the above code cannot work, since the returned values cannot meet the constraint. I am sorry [smile]
[/edit]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
darookie: What I want is described clearly in the original post; I want that assertion to be true for any signed integers i and j. And thank you for your suggestion, I will try that shortly.

SiCrane: yes, I can assume that as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
#include <boost/cstdint.hpp>

using boost::int64_t;

unsigned long F(signed long i)
{
return (int64_t(1) << sizeof(long)) - (i + (int64_t(1) << (sizeof(long) - 1)));
}

? (assuming your compiler provides boost::int64_t).

Enigma

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Maybe I'm missing something but couldn't you just add the signed bias and complement the result?
unsigned long F(signed long value) {
value += 0x80000000;
return ~value;
}
Which should be equivalent to:
unsigned long F(signed long value) {
return value ^ LONG_MAX;
}

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
doynax is corrext. The following preserves the order when mapping a signed integer to an unsigned integer:
unsigned long F(signed long num)
{
return (unsigned long)num ^ 0x80000000;
}


To reverse the order, reverse the XOR.
unsigned long F(signed long num)
{
return (unsigned long)num ^ 0x7FFFFFFF;
}

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote:
Original post by ToohrVyk
The post is correct, I do want to reverse the comparison.
It looks very much to me like your OP is reversing the comparison. If 5 > 3 you want F(3) > F(5).

I would simply add the offset required to make the most negative value equal to zero (which would be 0x80000000), then cast it to an unsigned.
In fact, that's exactly what I did in my signed bigint class. For a signed comparison it does just that, then calls the unsigned comparison functions.

I'm impressed that Nemesis2k2 also describes the reversal, which I hdan't thought of, and as others have mentioned, the add can be replaced with an xor.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
TBH, i didn't fully understand your question.

however, you might want to look into boost. theres a something called something along the lines of "numeric_cast"... this has saved my ass plenty of times (in networking code where i was always casting from signed / unsigned). it throws an exception if there is any loss of data.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This topic is 4378 days old which is more than the 365 day threshold we allow for new replies. Please post a new topic.

If you intended to correct an error in the post then please contact us.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

Sign in to follow this