Java boolean method needs extra return statement? - java

I am starting with java and while I was writing a way to identify whether a number was prime I wrote a method like this
public static boolean checkPrime(int n){
int x = 2;
while (((n % x) != 0) && (n > x)){
x = x + 1;
}
if(((n % x) == 0) && (n == x)){
return !Prime;
}
else if(((n % x) == 0) && (n > x)){
return Prime;
}
else {
return Prime;
}
}
What I couldn't figure out was the necessity of the last else statement. If I do not put it, I get an error message. However I don't think it is necessary since all possibilities are covered by the previous loops, with their respecting return statements. Or am I missing something?

You don't need the else. What you are being told by the compiler is the method must return SOMETHING. Your last else block could replaced by this:
return PrimeOrNot;
In fact, your method could look like this:
public static boolean checkPrime(int n){
int x = 2;
while (((n % x) != 0) && (n > x)){
x = x + 1;
}
if(((n % x) == 0) && (n == x)){
return !(PrimeOrNot);
}
return (PrimeOrNot);
}
In any case your very last statement block cannot be an else if.

The method has a return type of boolean.
The compiler is scared by the possibility in which none of the 'if' cases are met. In this situation, the method know what to return. This method needs to return something, so just give it a 'return true' before the method ends. It won't ever be read, but it will make the compiler happy.

The conditional expressions within the if/else-if are only evaluated at runtime. Normally, the compiler wouldn't know what the result would be, because they are not evaluated at compile-time. Only, situation when the compiler can figure what the result of the expression would be is when it's some compile-time constant (like if(true) {).

public static boolean checkPrime(int n){
boolean PrimeOrNot = false;
int x = 2;
while (((n % x) != 0) && (n > x)){
x = x + 1;
}
if(((n % x) == 0) && (n == x)){
return !(PrimeOrNot);
}
else if(((n % x) == 0) && (n > x)){
return (PrimeOrNot);
}
return PrimeOrNot;
}

A method which returns a value will be compilable if it returns a value in all its possible code paths.
Imagine for a moment that you're the compiler. You see this code:
int myMethod()
{
if (cond)
return anInt;
}
While you may know that cond is in fact always true, the compiler will not know that. It can only be sure about the result of a boolean expression if it is an expression which can be evaluated at compile time only.
Note that the vast majority of "code optimization" in Java is in fact done at run time (JIT: Just In Time).

The compiler only checks to see if there are valid return paths from your method. The compiler isn't "smart" enough to inspect the conditional statements and determine whether the conditions can be logically met -- the compiler simply checks to make sure that some value is returned to respect the contract of the method declaration.
Some would argue that the following is a cleaner structure for the method (but I think it is just a matter of taste):
public static boolean checkPrime(int n){
int x = 2;
while (((n % x) != 0) && (n > x)){
x = x + 1;
}
if(((n % x) == 0) && (n == x)){
return !(PrimeOrNot);
}
return (PrimeOrNot);
}

Related

How to reverse an integer?

I have a code to reverse an integer, but it does not work, can't seem to find the bug.
public static void test(int N) {
int enable_print = N % 10;
while (N > 0) {
if (enable_print == 0 && N % 10 != 0) {
enable_print = 1;
} else if (enable_print == 1) {
System.out.print(N % 10);
}
N = N / 10;
}
}
Sometimes it is easier and/or better to rewrite instead of debugging.
Write or think of your algorithm in pseudocode where each high level step is then broken down into more pseudocode. Your conditions seem strange and therefore hard to debug.
It is best not to embed a print directly into the heart of a loop. Rather, build a string and return it. Let the caller print a string.
System.out.println (reverseInt (12345));
public static String reverseInt (anInt) {
Initialize a StringBuffer with an empty string.
while (anInt > 0) {
Get last digit by modulo 10 and put in StringBuffer.
Prepend digit in StringBuffer.
Chop off last digit by doing integer divide.
}
return StringBuffer's .toString ();
}
An alternate algorithm would call reverseInt recursively to build an ever growing string.
if and else if both works together in a sequence from top to down
if(true) { execute } else if() { done execute even if condition is true } else { done execute}
if(false) else if(check condition) { if true execute other wise go to next condition}
So on..
in your case, this is going to be solution
public static void test(int N) {
int enable_print = N % 10;
while (N > 0) {
if (enable_print == 0 && N % 10 != 0) {
enable_print = 1;
}
if (enable_print == 1) {
System.out.print(N % 10);
}
N = N / 10;
}
}

Returning multiple values from a method based on a condition

I have a function and I need to change the return value based on a condition, I managed to get only one return cause the data is static while I need to make it dynamic as shown in below code
public boolean outBound(int c_x, int c_y) {
return (blackCarX > 150 && blackCarX < 690 && blackCarY > 200 && blackCarY < 500);
}
I need to say if the x or y equals a specific number, return a different output
any advice?
This is the error I am receiving for my condition:
if (c_x > 150 && c_x < 690 && c_y > 200 && c_y < 500){
return(c_x, x_y);
}
DrawCars.java:132: error: ')' expected return(c_x, x_y) ^
DrawCars.java:132: error: not a statement return(c_x, x_y) ^
DrawCars.java:132: error: ';' expected return(c_x, x_y)
You can use if else statement
public boolean outBound(int c_x, int c_y) {
if(blackCarX > 150){
return a;
} else if (blackCarX < 690){
return b;
}
}
if you have only 2 values you can also use ? statement
public boolean outBound(int c_x, int c_y) {
return blackCarX > 150 ? a : b;
}
You need to use an if-else statement
or,
the ?: operator
Your question is not clear on how you want to use c_x or c_y so I'm making my own little example below.
For instance,
if-else statement
if(a > b) {
return i;
} else {
return j;
?: operator
(a > b) ? return i : return j // This does same thing as 1.

How to fix a stack overflow in my java program?

So, I am studying java, and as a first exercise I decided to write two small and composable functions, namely a fibbonacci and a factorial function, which have a common implementation detail, however I received a stack overflow exception when I tried to separate their common part into a separate function. Any tips on what am I doing wrong?
public class BaseFunctions{
static Integer factorial(Integer num) {
return factorial(comComponent(num)-1)*num;
}
static Integer fibbonacci(Integer num) {
return fibbonacci(comComponent(num)-1) + fibbonacci(comComponent(num)-2);
}
static Integer comComponent(Integer num) {
if(num == 1 || num == 0) {
return 1;
}else if(num < 0){
throw new ArithmeticException("Num must be > 0");
}else return num;
}
}
When you reach num = 0, comComponent will return 1, calling your function with num = 0 again, thus getting stuck in an infinite loop.
A recursive function must have an exit point (which must be checked first before any recursive call), if not this leads to Stack Overflow.
What you do is leave the function without that exit point, be delegating (or so you think) this functionality to comComponent().
But take a look at the code inside factorial():
return factorial(comComponent(num)-1)*num;
Why should it ever stop? There is no return statement without a recursive call.
So your logic is wrong.
Drop comComponent() and stick to the traditional way:
static Integer factorial(Integer num) {
if (num == 1 || num == 0)
return 1;
else if (num < 0)
throw new ArithmeticException("Num must be > 0");
else
return factorial(num - 1) * num;
}
static Integer fibbonacci(Integer num) {
if (num == 1 || num == 0)
return 1;
else if (num < 0)
throw new ArithmeticException("Num must be > 0");
else
return fibbonacci(num - 1) + fibbonacci(num - 2);
}
As you can see both functions have an exit point:
if (num == 1 || num == 0)
return 1;

If statement return loop

Just a declaimer:i am a beginner in java.
Write a method named numUnique that takes three integers as parameters and that returns the number of unique integers among the three. For example, the call numUnique(18, 3, 4) should return 3 because the parameters have 3 different values. By contrast, the call numUnique(6, 7, 6) would return 2 because there are only 2 unique numbers among the three parameters: 6 and 7.
public int numUnique(int x,int y,int z){
    if(x==y||y==z){
}
return 1;
else if(x!=y||y!=z){
}
return 2;
    
}
I am very confused about the relationship of if and return.I always put return inside if statement.But i dont understand why does it generate me an error message.if something is fulfil,i return in the loop.Why is it wrong.But on the other hand,the println statement can be put inside for loops.
Another issue,because this question,i tried to attempt using if else too.But my first condition is if and i return it.So after that i placed else if after the first return,it gives me error again.
I will appreciate someone will explain to me and i will alter the codes on my own.Please dont give me the full codes.Thank you.
Edited*
By the way,i read through all the comments and i finally understand it.This is my codes that i work out on my own(:
public static int numUnique(int x, int y, int z) {
if(x==y && y==z){
return 1;
}else if(x==y && y!=z || y==z && z!=x || x==z && y!=z ){
return 2;
}
return 3;
}
The return statements should be placed within the curly bracets.
To give you a clear understanding of "return" statements, i will say there can be only one return statement in one block of code i.e {...}.
"return" statement is used to return to the caller, and it has to be last statement of the block.
As suggested by you i am not providing you complete code, rather making you aware of usage of "return" statement.
In your code you are writing two "return" statements in one block.
i think you need to write return statements inside if-else blocks otherwise it will always return 1
The syntax for a what you want looks like this:
public static int numUnique(int x,int y,int z){
if(x==y||y==z){
return 1;
}else if(x!=y||y!=z){
return 2;
}
return 3;
}
Maybee this code ist better understandable:
public static int numUnique(int x, int y, int z) {
if (x == y && x == z && y == z) {
return 3;
} else if (x != y && x != z && y != z) {
return 1;
}
return 2;
}
Pseudocode If
if( condition ){
// do something if condition is true
}
Pseudocode If then else
if( condition){
// do something
}else{
// do something if condition is false
}
Pseudocode elseif
if( condition ){
// do something
}else if(condition2){
// do something, only if condition2 is true, if condition 1 is true, you never will be here
}else{
// do something, your only here if the two conditions above were false
}
A return statement, immidiently brakes execution ( there are some exception, exmaple: the finally block)
First, your return are outside the if statements, they should be inside. Because if you write:
if(Something) {
}
return 1;
Then 1 will be always returned because your if is empty. If you want to return 1 only if(Something) then write it inside the if body:
if(Something) {
return 1;
}
Second, your logic is not good. You need to check:
if x == y == z then they're all equal.
if x == y and x != z then you should return 2.
if x != y != z then you should return 0.
....
You need to cover all situations.
since if is a conditional flow, i may or may not run (depending on the condition),
but if your method has return type it should return in every cases. But in the later case, (if condition is false), it wont find any return.
so if you write
public int value(boolean flag){
if(flag){
return 0; //only reachable if flag is true, else value can not return from here
}
}
it is wrong, since if flag is false method wont return anything. so you must provide a return in else or after if block ends
using the fact that Sets store values only once...
public int numUnique(int x,int y,int z){
Set<Integer> number = new HashSet<Integer>();
number.add(x);
number.add(y);
number.add(z);
return numbers.size();
}
You have to put the return statement in the block from if and else:
public int numUnique(int x,int y,int z){
if(x==y||y==z){
return 1;
}
else if(x!=y||y!=z){
return 2;
}
}
it fails because the compiler think, that you have not a return statement for the function in every path.
Your code is ill-formed:
And if-else statement is as following:
if { code }
else { code }
So, if and else blocks make a pair. But you have:
if (condition) { code }
code
else { code }
code
So, the code just above the word else breaks this pair, and else remains isolated, and thus your program is syntactically incorrect.
You "want" to do:
if (x==y || y == z) {
return 1;
}
else if (x != y || y != z) {
return 2;
}
Moreover, if a if (or else) block has only one line, you can erase the brackets:
if (x==y || y == z)
return 1;
else if (x != y || y != z)
return 2;
Even more, you algorithms isn't a solution to your problem, ¿how about 3 unique values?. You should check more situations (all diferents, all equals, or only one different).

How to determine if a number is positive or negative?

I was asked in an interview, how to determine whether a number is positive or negative. The rules are that we should not use relational operators such as <, and >, built in java functions (like substring, indexOf, charAt, and startsWith), no regex, or API's.
I did some homework on this and the code is given below, but it only works for integer type. But they asked me to write a generic code that works for float, double, and long.
// This might not be better way!!
S.O.P ((( number >> 31 ) & 1) == 1 ? "- ve number " : "+ve number );
any ideas from your side?
The integer cases are easy. The double case is trickier, until you remember about infinities.
Note: If you consider the double constants "part of the api", you can replace them with overflowing expressions like 1E308 * 2.
int sign(int i) {
if (i == 0) return 0;
if (i >> 31 != 0) return -1;
return +1;
}
int sign(long i) {
if (i == 0) return 0;
if (i >> 63 != 0) return -1;
return +1;
}
int sign(double f) {
if (f != f) throw new IllegalArgumentException("NaN");
if (f == 0) return 0;
f *= Double.POSITIVE_INFINITY;
if (f == Double.POSITIVE_INFINITY) return +1;
if (f == Double.NEGATIVE_INFINITY) return -1;
//this should never be reached, but I've been wrong before...
throw new IllegalArgumentException("Unfathomed double");
}
The following is a terrible approach that would get you fired at any job...
It depends on you getting a Stack Overflow Exception [or whatever Java calls it]... And it would only work for positive numbers that don't deviate from 0 like crazy.
Negative numbers are fine, since you would overflow to positive, and then get a stack overflow exception eventually [which would return false, or "yes, it is negative"]
Boolean isPositive<T>(T a)
{
if(a == 0) return true;
else
{
try
{
return isPositive(a-1);
}catch(StackOverflowException e)
{
return false; //It went way down there and eventually went kaboom
}
}
}
This will only works for everything except [0..2]
boolean isPositive = (n % (n - 1)) * n == n;
You can make a better solution like this (works except for [0..1])
boolean isPositive = ((n % (n - 0.5)) * n) / 0.5 == n;
You can get better precision by changing the 0.5 part with something like 2^m (m integer):
boolean isPositive = ((n % (n - 0.03125)) * n) / 0.03125 == n;
You can do something like this:
((long) (num * 1E308 * 1E308) >> 63) == 0 ? "+ve" : "-ve"
The main idea here is that we cast to a long and check the value of the most significant bit. As a double/float between -1 and 0 will round to zero when cast to a long, we multiply by large doubles so that a negative float/double will be less than -1. Two multiplications are required because of the existence of subnormals (it doesn't really need to be that big though).
What about this?
return ((num + "").charAt(0) == '-');
// Returns 0 if positive, nonzero if negative
public long sign(long value) {
return value & 0x8000000000000000L;
}
Call like:
long val1 = ...;
double val2 = ...;
float val3 = ...;
int val4 = ...;
sign((long) valN);
Casting from double / float / integer to long should preserve the sign, if not the actual value...
You say
we should not use conditional operators
But this is a trick requirement, because == is also a conditional operator. There is also one built into ? :, while, and for loops. So nearly everyone has failed to provide an answer meeting all the requirements.
The only way to build a solution without a conditional operator is to use lookup table vs one of a few other people's solutions that can be boiled down to 0/1 or a character, before a conditional is met.
Here are the answers that I think might work vs a lookup table:
Nabb
Steven Schlansker
Dennis Cheung
Gary Rowe
This solution uses modulus. And yes, it also works for 0.5 (tests are below, in the main method).
public class Num {
public static int sign(long x) {
if (x == 0L || x == 1L) return (int) x;
return x == Long.MIN_VALUE || x % (x - 1L) == x ? -1 : 1;
}
public static int sign(double x) {
if (x != x) throw new IllegalArgumentException("NaN");
if (x == 0.d || x == 1.d) return (int) x;
if (x == Double.POSITIVE_INFINITY) return 1;
if (x == Double.NEGATIVE_INFINITY) return -1;
return x % (x - 1.d) == x ? -1 : 1;
}
public static int sign(int x) {
return Num.sign((long)x);
}
public static int sign(float x) {
return Num.sign((double)x);
}
public static void main(String args[]) {
System.out.println(Num.sign(Integer.MAX_VALUE)); // 1
System.out.println(Num.sign(1)); // 1
System.out.println(Num.sign(0)); // 0
System.out.println(Num.sign(-1)); // -1
System.out.println(Num.sign(Integer.MIN_VALUE)); // -1
System.out.println(Num.sign(Long.MAX_VALUE)); // 1
System.out.println(Num.sign(1L)); // 1
System.out.println(Num.sign(0L)); // 0
System.out.println(Num.sign(-1L)); // -1
System.out.println(Num.sign(Long.MIN_VALUE)); // -1
System.out.println(Num.sign(Double.POSITIVE_INFINITY)); // 1
System.out.println(Num.sign(Double.MAX_VALUE)); // 1
System.out.println(Num.sign(0.5d)); // 1
System.out.println(Num.sign(0.d)); // 0
System.out.println(Num.sign(-0.5d)); // -1
System.out.println(Num.sign(Double.MIN_VALUE)); // -1
System.out.println(Num.sign(Double.NEGATIVE_INFINITY)); // -1
System.out.println(Num.sign(Float.POSITIVE_INFINITY)); // 1
System.out.println(Num.sign(Float.MAX_VALUE)); // 1
System.out.println(Num.sign(0.5f)); // 1
System.out.println(Num.sign(0.f)); // 0
System.out.println(Num.sign(-0.5f)); // -1
System.out.println(Num.sign(Float.MIN_VALUE)); // -1
System.out.println(Num.sign(Float.NEGATIVE_INFINITY)); // -1
System.out.println(Num.sign(Float.NaN)); // Throws an exception
}
}
This code covers all cases and types:
public static boolean isNegative(Number number) {
return (Double.doubleToLongBits(number.doubleValue()) & Long.MIN_VALUE) == Long.MIN_VALUE;
}
This method accepts any of the wrapper classes (Integer, Long, Float and Double) and thanks to auto-boxing any of the primitive numeric types (int, long, float and double) and simply checks it the high bit, which in all types is the sign bit, is set.
It returns true when passed any of:
any negative int/Integer
any negative long/Long
any negative float/Float
any negative double/Double
Double.NEGATIVE_INFINITY
Float.NEGATIVE_INFINITY
and false otherwise.
Untested, but illustrating my idea:
boolean IsNegative<T>(T v) {
return (v & ((T)-1));
}
It seems arbitrary to me because I don't know how you would get the number as any type, but what about checking Abs(number) != number? Maybe && number != 0
Integers are trivial; this you already know. The deep problem is how to deal with floating-point values. At that point, you've got to know a bit more about how floating point values actually work.
The key is Double.doubleToLongBits(), which lets you get at the IEEE representation of the number. (The method's really a direct cast under the hood, with a bit of magic for dealing with NaN values.) Once a double has been converted to a long, you can just use 0x8000000000000000L as a mask to select the sign bit; if zero, the value is positive, and if one, it's negative.
If it is a valid answer
boolean IsNegative(char[] v) throws NullPointerException, ArrayIndexOutOfBoundException
{
return v[0]=='-';
}
one more option I could think of
private static boolean isPositive(Object numberObject) {
Long number = Long.valueOf(numberObject.toString());
return Math.sqrt((number * number)) != number;
}
private static boolean isPositive(Object numberObject) {
Long number = Long.valueOf(numberObject.toString());
long signedLeftShifteredNumber = number << 1; // Signed left shift
long unsignedRightShifterNumber = signedLeftShifteredNumber >>> 1; // Unsigned right shift
return unsignedRightShifterNumber == number;
}
This one is roughly based on ItzWarty's answer, but it runs in logn time! Caveat: Only works for integers.
Boolean isPositive(int a)
{
if(a == -1) return false;
if(a == 0) return false;
if(a == 1) return true;
return isPositive(a/2);
}
I think there is a very simple solution:
public boolean isPositive(int|float|double|long i){
return (((i-i)==0)? true : false);
}
tell me if I'm wrong!
Try this without the code: (x-SQRT(x^2))/(2*x)
Write it using the conditional then take a look at the assembly code generated.
Why not get the square root of the number? If its negative - java will throw an error and we will handle it.
try {
d = Math.sqrt(THE_NUMBER);
}
catch ( ArithmeticException e ) {
console.putln("Number is negative.");
}
I don't know how exactly Java coerces numeric values, but the answer is pretty simple, if put in pseudocode (I leave the details to you):
sign(x) := (x == 0) ? 0 : (x/x)
If you are allowed to use "==" as seems to be the case, you can do something like that taking advantage of the fact that an exception will be raised if an array index is out of bounds. The code is for double, but you can cast any numeric type to a double (here the eventual loss of precision would not be important at all).
I have added comments to explain the process (bring the value in ]-2.0; -1.0] union [1.0; 2.0[) and a small test driver as well.
class T {
public static boolean positive(double f)
{
final boolean pos0[] = {true};
final boolean posn[] = {false, true};
if (f == 0.0)
return true;
while (true) {
// If f is in ]-1.0; 1.0[, multiply it by 2 and restart.
try {
if (pos0[(int) f]) {
f *= 2.0;
continue;
}
} catch (Exception e) {
}
// If f is in ]-2.0; -1.0] U [1.0; 2.0[, return the proper answer.
try {
return posn[(int) ((f+1.5)/2)];
} catch (Exception e) {
}
// f is outside ]-2.0; 2.0[, divide by 2 and restart.
f /= 2.0;
}
}
static void check(double f)
{
System.out.println(f + " -> " + positive(f));
}
public static void main(String args[])
{
for (double i = -10.0; i <= 10.0; i++)
check(i);
check(-1e24);
check(-1e-24);
check(1e-24);
check(1e24);
}
The output is:
-10.0 -> false
-9.0 -> false
-8.0 -> false
-7.0 -> false
-6.0 -> false
-5.0 -> false
-4.0 -> false
-3.0 -> false
-2.0 -> false
-1.0 -> false
0.0 -> true
1.0 -> true
2.0 -> true
3.0 -> true
4.0 -> true
5.0 -> true
6.0 -> true
7.0 -> true
8.0 -> true
9.0 -> true
10.0 -> true
-1.0E24 -> false
-1.0E-24 -> false
1.0E-24 -> true
1.0E24 -> true
Well, taking advantage of casting (since we don't care what the actual value is) perhaps the following would work. Bear in mind that the actual implementations do not violate the API rules. I've edited this to make the method names a bit more obvious and in light of #chris' comment about the {-1,+1} problem domain. Essentially, this problem does not appear to solvable without recourse to API methods within Float or Double that reference the native bit structure of the float and double primitives.
As everybody else has said: Stupid interview question. Grr.
public class SignDemo {
public static boolean isNegative(byte x) {
return (( x >> 7 ) & 1) == 1;
}
public static boolean isNegative(short x) {
return (( x >> 15 ) & 1) == 1;
}
public static boolean isNegative(int x) {
return (( x >> 31 ) & 1) == 1;
}
public static boolean isNegative(long x) {
return (( x >> 63 ) & 1) == 1;
}
public static boolean isNegative(float x) {
return isNegative((int)x);
}
public static boolean isNegative(double x) {
return isNegative((long)x);
}
public static void main(String[] args) {
// byte
System.out.printf("Byte %b%n",isNegative((byte)1));
System.out.printf("Byte %b%n",isNegative((byte)-1));
// short
System.out.printf("Short %b%n",isNegative((short)1));
System.out.printf("Short %b%n",isNegative((short)-1));
// int
System.out.printf("Int %b%n",isNegative(1));
System.out.printf("Int %b%n",isNegative(-1));
// long
System.out.printf("Long %b%n",isNegative(1L));
System.out.printf("Long %b%n",isNegative(-1L));
// float
System.out.printf("Float %b%n",isNegative(Float.MAX_VALUE));
System.out.printf("Float %b%n",isNegative(Float.NEGATIVE_INFINITY));
// double
System.out.printf("Double %b%n",isNegative(Double.MAX_VALUE));
System.out.printf("Double %b%n",isNegative(Double.NEGATIVE_INFINITY));
// interesting cases
// This will fail because we can't get to the float bits without an API and
// casting will round to zero
System.out.printf("{-1,1} (fail) %b%n",isNegative(-0.5f));
}
}
This solution uses no conditional operators, but relies on catching two excpetions.
A division error equates to the number originally being "negative". Alternatively, the number will eventually fall off the planet and throw a StackOverFlow exception if it is positive.
public static boolean isPositive( f)
{
int x;
try {
x = 1/((int)f + 1);
return isPositive(x+1);
} catch (StackOverFlow Error e) {
return true;
} catch (Zero Division Error e) {
return false;
}
}
What about the following?
T sign(T x) {
if(x==0) return 0;
return x/Math.abs(x);
}
Should work for every type T...
Alternatively, one can define abs(x) as Math.sqrt(x*x),
and if that is also cheating, implement your own square root function...
if (((Double)calcYourDouble()).toString().contains("-"))
doThis();
else doThat();
Combined generics with double API. Guess it's a bit of cheating, but at least we need to write only one method:
static <T extends Number> boolean isNegative(T number)
{
return ((number.doubleValue() * Double.POSITIVE_INFINITY) == Double.NEGATIVE_INFINITY);
}
Two simple solutions. Works also for infinities and numbers -1 <= r <= 1
Will return "positive" for NaNs.
String positiveOrNegative(double number){
return (((int)(number/0.0))>>31 == 0)? "positive" : "negative";
}
String positiveOrNegative(double number){
return (number==0 || ((int)(number-1.0))>>31==0)? "positive" : "negative";
}
There is a function is the math library called signnum.
http://www.tutorialspoint.com/java/lang/math_signum_float.htm
http://www.tutorialspoint.com/java/lang/math_signum_double.htm
It's easy to do this like
private static boolean isNeg(T l) {
return (Math.abs(l-1)>Math.abs(l));
}
static boolean isNegative(double v) {
return new Double(v).toString().startsWith("-");
}

Categories

Resources