I'm having a little trouble wrapping my head around this logic and thought I had a fix but am stumped now.
The goal is to create a 4 digit pin and have 3 unique numbers and 1 can be a duplicate. They can be in any order as well. Here is what i have so far:
boolean UniqueNums(String nums)
{
for (int i=0; i < 3; i++)
for (int j=i+1; j < 3; j++)
if (nums.charAt(i) == nums.charAt(j))
return false;
// If no duplicate characters encountered,
// return true
return true;
}
So if i pass the numbers 1137 it fails but other like 1371 pass.
I feel this is the different then the linked duplicate answer link, due to im not trying to do it in one line and I'm not just counting the number of times the number occurs. More a long the lines of validating the values being passed.
Any help or advice would be appreciated.
What about:
boolean UniqueNums(String data) {
Set<Character> found = new HashSet<>();
int count = 0;
for (char c : data.toCharArray()) {
boolean noClash = found.add(c);
count += (noClash ? 0 : 1);
if (count == 2) {
return false;
}
}
return true;
}
1234 returns true (no duplicate)
1231 returns true (a single duplicate)
1221 returns false (a pair of duplicates)
1112 returns false (a number used more than twice)
It also works if your PIN is longer then 4 characters, it only requires a single loop making it O(n), and it fails fast
Instead of nested for loops (with complexity O(n^2)), you can use hashing to count the occurrences of each digit and then check for valid pin number. Here is algorithm:
static boolean UniqueNums(String digit){
int array[] = new int[10];
for (int i=0;i<digit.length();i++){
array[digit.charAt(i)-48]++; //48 because ascii of 0 is 48
}
//Now check for frequency
int count = 0;
for (int i=0;i<10;i++){
if(array[i] > 2) return false;
if(array[i] == 2){
++count;
}
}
if(count <= 1) return true;
return false;
}
This will be of O(k), where k is number of digits in your number.
Because of the numeric limitations involved, your predicate can be reduced from:
a 4 digit pin and have 3 unique numbers and 1 can be a duplicate. they can be in any order as well.
to
have 3 unique characters
(Your code doesn't test for digits and length so I assume some other code does that.)
boolean hasAtLeastThreeUniqueCharacters = "1123".codePoints().distinct().count() >= 3;
You only need one additional int to maintain bit mask for each of the digits. A short would do but it gets widened to int in Integer.bitCount() call either way.
boolean uniqueNums(String nums) {
int pin = Integer.parseInt(nums);
int mask = 0;
for (int i = 0; i < nums.length(); i++) {
mask |= 1 << pin % 10;
pin /= 10;
}
return Integer.bitCount(mask) >= 3;
}
resulting in
uniqueNums("1234") // true
uniqueNums("9393") // false
You could also group numbers by occurrences, filter those which are at most 2 occurrences and so that their count could be as long as num length, or length - 1 (one duplicate) :
boolean atMostOneOneDuplicate(String num) {
long occurences = num.chars()
.mapToObj(i -> (char) i)
.collect(Collectors.groupingBy(c -> c, Collectors.counting()))
.entrySet()
.stream()
.map(Map.Entry::getValue)
.filter(v -> v < 3)
.count();
return occurences == num.length() || occurences == num.length() - 1;
}
I think keeping counters in a Map is simpler:
public boolean UniqueNums(String pin){
if(pin.length() > 4) {
//pin too long
return false;
}
Map<Character, Integer> counters = new HashMap<>();
for(int i = 0; i < pin.length(); i++){
Character c = pin.charAt(i);
if(!Character.isDigit(c)){
//not a number.
return false;
}
counters.put(c, counters.getOrDefault(c,0) + 1);
if(counters.get(i) > 2){
// digit appear 3 times.
return false;
}
}
if(counters.keySet().size() < pin.length() - 1){
// not 3 unique numbers e.g 1122
return false;
}
return true;
}
Use a map to keep track of occurances
import java.util.HashMap;
import java.util.Map;
class Main{
public static void main(String[] args) {
System.out.println(isValid("1137"));
System.out.println(isValid("1371"));
System.out.println(isValid("1234"));
System.out.println(isValid("1222"));
}
public static boolean isValid(String num){
Map<Character,Integer> digitsWithNumberOfOccurances = new HashMap<>();
int numOfDigitsThatOccuredTwice = 0;
for(int i = 0; i < num.length(); i++){
char currentChar = num.charAt(i);
int currentNumberOfOccurences = digitsWithNumberOfOccurances.getOrDefault(currentChar,0);
currentNumberOfOccurences ++;
digitsWithNumberOfOccurances.put(currentChar,currentNumberOfOccurences);
if(currentNumberOfOccurences == 2){
numOfDigitsThatOccuredTwice++;
// only one digit can occur twice
if(numOfDigitsThatOccuredTwice > 1) {
return false;
}
}else if(currentNumberOfOccurences > 2){ // no digit can occur more than twice
return false;
}
}
return true;
}
}
Related
I have tried out 387.First Unique Character In A string
Given a string s, find the first non-repeating character in it and
return its index. If it does not exist, return -1.
EXAMPLE : 1
Input: s = "leetcode"
Output: 0
EXAMPLE :2
Input: s = "loveleetcode"
Output: 2
I have been trying this problem. I thought we will pick one by one all the characters and check if a repeating character exists break from the loop. And if not then return that index.I have thought over a solution which I believe is not the most efficient way but I want to know the how can I solve this problem with the approach given below:
public int firstUniqChar(String s) {
for(int i=0;i<s.length();i++){
for(int j=i+1;j<s.length();j++){
if(s.charAt(i)==s.charAt(j)){
break;
}
}
}
return -1;
}
I'm confused how to return the index.I'm unable to find the logic after:
for(int j=i+1;j<s.length();j++){
if(s.charAt(i)==s.charAt(j)){
break;
}
}
If anyone can help me find out the logic here.
Try this.
public static int firstUniqChar(String s) {
L: for (int i = 0, length = s.length(); i < length; i++) {
for (int j = 0; j < length; j++)
if (i != j && s.charAt(i) == s.charAt(j))
continue L;
return i;
}
return -1;
}
public static void main(String[] args) {
System.out.println(firstUniqChar("leetcode"));
System.out.println(firstUniqChar("loveleetcode"));
System.out.println(firstUniqChar("aabb"));
}
output:
0
2
-1
you can use a flag variable.
public int firstUniqChar(String s) {
int flag=0;
for(int i=0;i<s.length();i++){
flag=0;
for(int j=0;j<s.length();j++){
if(s.charAt(i)==s.charAt(j) && i!=j){
flag=1;
break;
}
}
if(flag==0){
return i;
}
}
return -1;
}
There are 26 possible lowercase English letters, so you could use two 26 element arrays.
One array, letterCount, keeps counts of each letter. Start at 0 and add 1 every time the corresponding letter appears in the text string. The second array, position, holds the position of the first occurrence of that letter, or -1 if the letter never appears. You will need to initialise that array to -1 for all elements.
Process the string in order, recording initial positions, once only for each letter, and incrementing the count for each letter in the string.
After the string has been processed, look through the letterCount array. If there are no letters with a 1 count then return -1. If exactly one letter has a 1 count, then return the position of that letter from the position array. If more than one letter has a 1 count, then pick the one with the lowest value for its position.
Using two loops is a highly inefficient way of solving this problem. The string can be up to 100,000 characters long and you are processing it multiple times. Far better to process it only once, keeping track of what you have found so far.
Fix you code
You need to add a variable that tells you if you have breaked the loop or not
static int firstUniqChar(String s) {
boolean duplicate;
for (int i = 0; i < s.length(); i++) {
duplicate = false;
for (int j = i + 1; j < s.length(); j++) {
if (s.charAt(i) == s.charAt(j)) {
duplicate = true;
break;
}
}
if (!duplicate) {
return i;
}
}
return -1;
}
Improve
There is a smarter way, that is finding the last index occurence of the current char, if it's equal to the current index : that char is unique and you return its index
static int firstUniqChar(String s) {
for (int i = 0; i < s.length(); i++) {
if (s.lastIndexOf(s.charAt(i)) == i) {
return i;
}
}
return -1;
}
If you do not bother about time complexity using IdenxOF operations, then one can try this solution.
indexOf() – also runs in linear time. It iterates through the internal array and checking each element one by one. So the time
complexity for this operation always requires O(n) time.
int firstUniqCharOneLoop(String str) {
for (int i = 0; i < str.length(); i++) {
if (str.indexOf(str.charAt(i))== str.lastIndexOf(str.charAt(i)) ) {
return i;
}
}
return -1;
}
The lowest complexity I managed to achieve:
public class UniqueSymbolFinder {
static int findFirstUniqueChar(String s) {
Set<Character> set = new HashSet<>(s.length());
List<CharWithIndex> candidates = new LinkedList<>();
for (int i = 0; i < s.length(); i++) {
char ch = s.charAt(i);
CharWithIndex charWithIndex = new CharWithIndex(ch, i);
if (set.add(ch)) {
candidates.add(charWithIndex);
} else {
candidates.remove(charWithIndex);
}
}
return candidates.size() == 0 ? -1 : candidates.get(0).index;
}
/**
* Class for storing the index.
* Used to avoid of using an indexOf or other iterations.
*/
private static class CharWithIndex {
int index;
char ch;
private CharWithIndex(char ch, int index) {
this.ch = ch;
this.index = index;
}
#Override
public boolean equals(Object o) {
if (this == o) return true;
if (o == null || getClass() != o.getClass()) return false;
CharWithIndex that = (CharWithIndex) o;
return ch == that.ch;
}
#Override
public int hashCode() {
return Objects.hash(ch);
}
}
}
I believe the memory usage can still be optimized.
100% Correct JAVA Solution
Since the question is about returning the index of the first non-repeating character in a string, we need some data structure to save the index of each character in the string for us.
I choose here the HashMap of Java. Basically, what you can do with it, you can save a pair of values (or pair of other data structures).
So, in my solution, I am saving a Character Integer pair. The first is considered as a key (here it is each character in the string), and the second is its index value.
The problem here is that we only want to keep the minimum index of non-repeating characters and that's why if you take a look below, you will find the maxIndexForRepeatedValues is set to be 10 power 5 as the input constraint says 1 <= s.length <= 10 power 5.
However, I am using that value to neglect repeated characters that would be found in the HashMap and at the end, we retrieve the minimum index which is the index of course for the first character from the map, or if there were only repeated characters, we return -1.
To make the code shorter, I used ternary-operator but you can write it with if-else if you want!
class Solution {
public int firstUniqChar(String s) {
int maxIndexForRepeatedValues = 100000;
Map<Character, Integer> map = new HashMap<>();
for (int i = 0 ; i < s.length() ; i++) {
char key = s.charAt(i);
int resIndex = map.containsKey(key) ? maxIndexForRepeatedValues : i;
map.put(key, resIndex);
}
int minIndex = Collections.min(map.values());
return minIndex == maxIndexForRepeatedValues ? -1 : minIndex;
}
}
I'm trying to solve the following problem. Given an integer, n, list all n-digits numbers such that each number does not have repeating digits.
For example, if n is 4, then the output is as follows:
0123
0124
0125
...
9875
9876
Total number of 4-digit numbers is 5040
My present approach is by brute-force. I can generate all n-digit numbers, then, using a Set, list all numbers with no repeating digits. However, I'm pretty sure there is a faster, better and more elegant way of doing this.
I'm programming in Java, but I can read source code in C.
Thanks
Mathematically, you have 10 options for the first number, 9 for the second, 8 for the 3rd, and 7 for the 4th. So, 10 * 9 * 8 * 7 = 5040.
Programmatically, you can generate these with some combinations logic. Using a functional approach usually keeps code cleaner; meaning build up a new string recursively as opposed to trying to use a StringBuilder or array to keep modifying your existing string.
Example Code
The following code will generate the permutations, without reusing digits, without any extra set or map/etc.
public class LockerNumberNoRepeats {
public static void main(String[] args) {
System.out.println("Total combinations = " + permutations(4));
}
public static int permutations(int targetLength) {
return permutations("", "0123456789", targetLength);
}
private static int permutations(String c, String r, int targetLength) {
if (c.length() == targetLength) {
System.out.println(c);
return 1;
}
int sum = 0;
for (int i = 0; i < r.length(); ++i) {
sum += permutations(c + r.charAt(i), r.substring(0,i) + r.substring(i + 1), targetLength);
}
return sum;
}
}
Output:
...
9875
9876
Total combinations = 5040
Explanation
Pulling this from a comment by #Rick as it was very well said and helps to clarify the solution.
So to explain what is happening here - it's recursing a function which takes three parameters: a list of digits we've already used (the string we're building - c), a list of digits we haven't used yet (the string r) and the target depth or length. Then when a digit is used, it is added to c and removed from r for subsequent recursive calls, so you don't need to check if it is already used, because you only pass in those which haven't already been used.
it's easy to find a formula. i.e.
if n=1 there are 10 variants.
if n=2 there are 9*10 variants.
if n=3 there are 8*9*10 variants.
if n=4 there are 7*8*9*10 variants.
Note the symmetry here:
0123
0124
...
9875
9876
9876 = 9999 - 123
9875 = 9999 - 124
So for starters you can chop the work in half.
It's possible that you might be able to find a regex which covers scenarios such that if a digit occurs twice in the same string then it matches/fails.
Whether the regex will be faster or not, who knows?
Specifically for four digits you could have nested For loops:
for (int i = 0; i < 10; i++) {
for (int j = 0; j < 10; j++) {
if (j != i) {
for (int k = 0; k < 10; k++) {
if ((k != j) && (k != i)) {
for (int m = 0; m < 10; m++) {
if ((m != k) && (m != j) && (m != i)) {
someStringCollection.add((((("" + i) + j) + k) + m));
(etc)
Alternatively, for a more generalised solution, this is a good example of the handy-dandy nature of recursion. E.g. you have a function which takes the list of previous digits, and required depth, and if the number of required digits is less than the depth just have a loop of ten iterations (through each value for the digit you're adding), if the digit doesn't exist in the list already then add it to the list and recurse. If you're at the correct depth just concatenate all the digits in the list and add it to the collection of valid strings you have.
Backtracking method is also a brute-force method.
private static int pickAndSet(byte[] used, int last) {
if (last >= 0) used[last] = 0;
int start = (last < 0) ? 0 : last + 1;
for (int i = start; i < used.length; i++) {
if (used[i] == 0) {
used[i] = 1;
return i;
}
}
return -1;
}
public static int get_series(int n) {
if (n < 1 || n > 10) return 0;
byte[] used = new byte[10];
int[] result = new int[n];
char[] output = new char[n];
int idx = 0;
boolean dirForward = true;
int count = 0;
while (true) {
result[idx] = pickAndSet(used, dirForward ? -1 : result[idx]);
if (result[idx] < 0) { //fail, should rewind.
if (idx == 0) break; //the zero index rewind failed, think all over.
dirForward = false;
idx --;
continue;
} else {//forward.
dirForward = true;
}
idx ++;
if (n == idx) {
for (int k = 0; k < result.length; k++) output[k] = (char)('0' + result[k]);
System.out.println(output);
count ++;
dirForward = false;
idx --;
}
}
return count;
}
I am trying to figure out how to count all numbers between two ints(a and b), where all of the digits are divisible with another int(k) and 0 counts as divisible.Here is what I've made so far, but it is looping forever.
for (int i = a; i<=b; i++){
while (i < 10) {
digit = i % 10;
if(digit % k == 0 || digit == 0){
count ++;
}
i = i / 10;
}
}
Also I was thinking about comparing if all of the digits were divisible by counting them and comparing with number of digits int length = (int)Math.Log10(Math.Abs(number)) + 1;
Any help would be appreciated. Thank you!
Once you get in to your while block you're never going to get out of it. The while condition is when i less than 10. You're dividing i by 10 at the end of the whole block. i will never have a chance of getting above 10.
Try this one
public class Calculator {
public static void main(String[] args) {
int a = 2;
int b = 150;
int k = 3;
int count = 0;
for (int i = a; i <= b; i++) {
boolean isDivisible = true;
int num = i;
while (num != 0) {
int digit = num % 10;
if (digit % k != 0) {
isDivisible = false;
break;
}
num /= 10;
}
if (isDivisible) {
count++;
System.out.println(i+" is one such number.");
}
}
System.out.println("Total " + count + " numbers are divisible by " + k);
}
}
Ok, so there are quite a few things going on here, so we'll take this a piece at a time.
for (int i = a; i <= b; i++){
// This line is part of the biggest problem. This will cause the
// loop to skip entirely when you start with a >= 10. I'm assuming
// this is not the case, as you are seeing an infinite loop - which
// will happen when a < 10, for reasons I'll show below.
while (i < 10) {
digit = i % 10;
if(digit % k == 0 || digit == 0){
count ++;
// A missing line here will cause you to get incorrect
// results. You don't terminate the loop, so what you are
// actually counting is every digit that is divisible by k
// in every number between a and b.
}
// This is the other part of the biggest problem. This line
// causes the infinite loop because you are modifying the
// variable you are using as the loop counter. Mutable state is
// tricky like that.
i = i / 10;
}
}
It's possible to re-write this with minimal changes, but there are some improvements you can make that will provide a more readable result. This code is untested, but does compile, and should get you most of the way there.
// Extracting this out into a function is often a good idea.
private int countOfNumbersWithAllDigitsDivisibleByN(final int modBy, final int start, final int end) {
int count = 0;
// I prefer += to ++, as each statement should do only one thing,
// it's easier to reason about
for (int i = start; i <= end; i += 1) {
// Pulling this into a separate function prevents leaking
// state, which was the bulk of the issue in the original.
// Ternary if adds 1 or 0, depending on the result of the
// method call. When the methods are named sensibly, I find
// this can be more readable than a regular if construct.
count += ifAllDigitsDivisibleByN(modBy, i) ? 1 : 0;
}
return count;
}
private boolean ifAllDigitsDivisibleByN(final int modBy, final int i) {
// For smaller numbers, this won't make much of a difference, but
// in principle, there's no real reason to check every instance of
// a particular digit.
for(Integer digit : uniqueDigitsInN(i)) {
if ( !isDigitDivisibleBy(modBy, digit) ) {
return false;
}
}
return true;
}
// The switch to Integer is to avoid Java's auto-boxing, which
// can get expensive inside of a tight loop.
private boolean isDigitDivisibleBy(final Integer modBy, final Integer digit) {
// Always include parens to group sub-expressions, forgetting the
// precedence rules between && and || is a good way to introduce
// bugs.
return digit == 0 || (digit % modBy == 0);
}
private Set<Integer> uniqueDigitsInN(final int number) {
// Sets are an easy and efficient way to cull duplicates.
Set<Integer> digitsInN = new HashSet<>();
for (int n = number; n != 0; n /= 10) {
digitsInN.add(n % 10);
}
return digitsInN;
}
I am practicing past exam papers for a basic java exam, and I am finding it difficult to make a for loop work for testing whether a number is prime. I don't want to complicate it by adding efficiency measures for larger numbers, just something that would at least work for 2 digit numbers.
At the moment it always returns false even if n IS a prime number.
I think my problem is that I am getting something wrong with the for loop itself and where to put the "return true;" and "return false;"... I'm sure it's a really basic mistake I'm making...
public boolean isPrime(int n) {
int i;
for (i = 2; i <= n; i++) {
if (n % i == 0) {
return false;
}
}
return true;
}
The reason I couldn't find help elsewhere on stackoverflow is because similar questions were asking for a more complicated implementation to have a more efficient way of doing it.
Your for loop has a little problem. It should be: -
for (i = 2; i < n; i++) // replace `i <= n` with `i < n`
Of course you don't want to check the remainder when n is divided by n. It will always give you 1.
In fact, you can even reduce the number of iterations by changing the condition to: - i <= n / 2. Since n can't be divided by a number greater than n / 2, except when we consider n, which we don't have to consider at all.
So, you can change your for loop to: -
for (i = 2; i <= n / 2; i++)
You can stop much earlier and skip through the loop faster with:
public boolean isPrime(long n) {
// fast even test.
if(n > 2 && (n & 1) == 0)
return false;
// only odd factors need to be tested up to n^0.5
for(int i = 3; i * i <= n; i += 2)
if (n % i == 0)
return false;
return true;
}
Error is i<=n
for (i = 2; i<n; i++){
You should write i < n, because the last iteration step will give you true.
public class PrimeNumberCheck {
private static int maxNumberToCheck = 100;
public PrimeNumberCheck() {
}
public static void main(String[] args) {
PrimeNumberCheck primeNumberCheck = new PrimeNumberCheck();
for(int ii=0;ii < maxNumberToCheck; ii++) {
boolean isPrimeNumber = primeNumberCheck.isPrime(ii);
System.out.println(ii + " is " + (isPrimeNumber == true ? "prime." : "not prime."));
}
}
private boolean isPrime(int numberToCheck) {
boolean isPrime = true;
if(numberToCheck < 2) {
isPrime = false;
}
for(int ii=2;ii<numberToCheck;ii++) {
if(numberToCheck%ii == 0) {
isPrime = false;
break;
}
}
return isPrime;
}
}
With this code number divisible by 3 will be skipped the for loop code initialization.
For loop iteration will also skip multiples of 3.
private static boolean isPrime(int n) {
if ((n > 2 && (n & 1) == 0) // check is it even
|| n <= 1 //check for -ve
|| (n > 3 && (n % 3 == 0))) { //check for 3 divisiable
return false;
}
int maxLookup = (int) Math.sqrt(n);
for (int i = 3; (i+2) <= maxLookup; i = i + 6) {
if (n % (i+2) == 0 || n % (i+4) == 0) {
return false;
}
}
return true;
}
You could also use some simple Math property for this in your for loop.
A number 'n' will be a prime number if and only if it is divisible by itself or 1.
If a number is not a prime number it will have two factors:
n = a * b
you can use the for loop to check till sqrt of the number 'n' instead of going all the way to 'n'. As in if 'a' and 'b' both are greater than the sqrt of the number 'n', a*b would be greater than 'n'. So at least one of the factors must be less than or equal to the square root.
so your loop would be something like below:
for(int i=2; i<=Math.sqrt(n); i++)
By doing this you would drastically reduce the run time complexity of the code.
I think it would come down to O(n/2).
One of the fastest way is looping only till the square root of n.
private static boolean isPrime(int n){
int square = (int)Math.ceil((Math.sqrt(n)));//find the square root
HashSet<Integer> nos = new HashSet<>();
for(int i=1;i<=square;i++){
if(n%i==0){
if(n/i==i){
nos.add(i);
}else{
nos.add(i);
int rem = n/i;
nos.add(rem);
}
}
}
return nos.size()==2;//if contains 1 and n then prime
}
You are checking i<=n.So when i==n, you will get 0 only and it will return false always.Try i<=(n/2).No need to check until i<n.
The mentioned above algorithm treats 1 as prime though it is not.
Hence here is the solution.
static boolean isPrime(int n) {
int perfect_modulo = 0;
boolean prime = false;
for ( int i = 1; i <= n; i++ ) {
if ( n % i == 0 ) {
perfect_modulo += 1;
}
}
if ( perfect_modulo == 2 ) {
prime = true;
}
return prime;
}
Doing it the Java 8 way is nicer and cleaner
private static boolean isPrimeA(final int number) {
return IntStream
.rangeClosed(2, number/2)
.noneMatch(i -> number%i == 0);
}
I'm trying to convert an integer to a 7 bit Boolean binary array. So far the code doesn't work:
If i input say integer 8 to be converted, instead of 0001000 I get 1000000, or say 15 I should get 0001111 but I get 1111000. The char array is a different length to the binary array and the positions are wrong.
public static void main(String[] args){
String maxAmpStr = Integer.toBinaryString(8);
char[] arr = maxAmpStr.toCharArray();
boolean[] binaryarray = new boolean[7];
for (int i=0; i<maxAmpStr.length(); i++){
if (arr[i] == '1'){
binaryarray[i] = true;
}
else if (arr[i] == '0'){
binaryarray[i] = false;
}
}
System.out.println(maxAmpStr);
System.out.println(binaryarray[0]);
System.out.println(binaryarray[1]);
System.out.println(binaryarray[2]);
System.out.println(binaryarray[3]);
System.out.println(binaryarray[4]);
System.out.println(binaryarray[5]);
System.out.println(binaryarray[6]);
}
Any help is appreciated.
There's really no need to deal with strings for this, just do bitwise comparisons for the 7 bits you're interested in.
public static void main(String[] args) {
int input = 15;
boolean[] bits = new boolean[7];
for (int i = 6; i >= 0; i--) {
bits[i] = (input & (1 << i)) != 0;
}
System.out.println(input + " = " + Arrays.toString(bits));
}
I would use this:
private static boolean[] toBinary(int number, int base) {
final boolean[] ret = new boolean[base];
for (int i = 0; i < base; i++) {
ret[base - 1 - i] = (1 << i & number) != 0;
}
return ret;
}
number 15 with base 7 will produce {false, false, false, true, true, true, true} = 0001111b
number 8, base 7 {false, false, false, true, false, false, false} = 0001000b
Hints: Think about what happens when you get a character representation that's less than seven characters.
In particular, think about how the char[] and boolean[] arrays "line up"; there will be extra elements in one than the other, so how should the indices coincide?
Actual answer: At the moment you're using the first element of the character array as the first element of the boolean array, which is only correct when you're using a seven-character string. In fact, you want the last elements of the arrays to coincide (so that the zeros are padded at the front not at the end).
One way to approach this problem would be to play around with the indices within the loop (e.g. work out the size difference and modify binaryarray[i + offset] instead). But an even simpler solution is just to left pad the string with zeros after the first line, to ensure it's exactly seven characters before converting it to the char array.
(Extra marks: what do you do when there's more than 7 characters in the array, e.g. if someone passes in 200 as an argument? Based on both solutions above you should be able to detect this case easily and handle it specifically.)
What you get when you do System.out.println(maxAmpStr); is "1000" in case of the 8.
So, you only get the relevant part, the first "0000" that you expected is just ommitted.
It's not pretty but what you could do is:
for (int i=0; i<maxAmpStr.length(); i++)
{
if (arr[i] == '1')
{
binaryarray[i+maxAmpStr.length()-1] = true;
}
else if (arr[i] == '0')
{
binaryarray[i+maxAmpStr.length()-1] = false;
}
}
Since nobody here has a answer with a dynamic array length, here is my solution:
public static boolean[] convertToBinary(int number) {
int binExpo = 0;
int bin = 1;
while(bin < number) { //calculates the needed digits
bin = bin*2;
binExpo++;
}
bin = bin/2;
boolean[] binary = new boolean[binExpo]; //array with the right length
binExpo--;
while(binExpo>=0) {
if(bin<=number) {
binary[binExpo] = true;
number =number -bin;
bin = bin/2;
}else {
binary[binExpo] = false;
}
binExpo--;
}
return binary;
}
The char-array is only as long as needed, so your boolean-array might be longer and places the bits at the wrong position. So start from behind, and when your char-array is finished, fill your boolean-array with 0's until first position.
Integer.toBinaryString(int i) does not pad. For e.g. Integer.toBinaryString(7) prints 111 not 00000111 as you expect. You need to take this into account when deciding where to start populating your boolean array.
15.ToBinaryString will be '1111'
You are lopping through that from first to last character, so the first '1' which is bit(3) is going into binaryArray[0] which I'm assuming should be bit 0.
You ned to pad ToBinaryString with leading zeros to a length of 7 (8 ??)
and then reverse the string, (or your loop)
Or you could stop messing about with strings and simply use bit wise operators
BinaryArray[3] = (SomeInt && 2^3 != 0);
^ = power operator or if not (1 << 3) or whatever is left shift in Java.
public static boolean[] convertToBinary(int b){
boolean[] binArray = new boolean[7];
boolean bin;
for(int i = 6; i >= 0; i--) {
if (b%2 == 1) bin = true;
else bin = false;
binArray[i] = bin;
b/=2;
}
return binArray;
}
public static String intToBinary(int num) {
int copy = num;
String sb = "";
for(int i=30; i>=0; i--) {
sb = (copy&1) + sb;
copy = copy >>>=1;
}
return sb;
}
AND the number with 1
Append the vale to a string
do unsigned right shift
repeat steps 1-3 for i=30..0
String maxAmpStr = Integer.toBinaryString(255);
char[] arr = maxAmpStr.toCharArray();
boolean[] binaryarray = new boolean[20];
int pivot = binaryarray.length - arr.length;
int j = binaryarray.length - 1;
for (int i = arr.length - 1; i >= 0; i--) {
if (arr[i] == '1') {
binaryarray[j] = true;
} else if (arr[i] == '0') {
binaryarray[j] = false;
}
if (j >= pivot)
j--;
}
System.out.println(maxAmpStr);
for (int k = 0; k < binaryarray.length; k++)
System.out.println(binaryarray[k]);
}