bit representation of unsigned int a = -1 - c

What is the bit representation of unsigned int x =-1;
Can we assign unsigned int with a negative integer?
#include<stdio.h>
int main(){
unsigned int x = -1;
int y = ~0;
if(x == y)
printf("same");
else
printf("not same");
return 0;
}
output :
same
and how is it possible, x being unsigned
#include<stdio.h>
int main()
{
unsigned int x = -4;
if (x == -4)
printf("true");
else
printf("FALSE");
}
output:
true

When an unsigned int value is compared to int value, the int value is implicitly converted to unsigned int type. The result of that conversion is congruent to the original value modulo 2N, where N is the number of value-forming bits in unsigned int. This modulo equals to UINT_MAX + 1.
For this reason initialization
unsigned int x = -1;
initializes x with some unsigned value congruent to -1 modulo UINT_MAX + 1. Incidentally, this is nothing else than UINT_MAX. This value has 1 in each value-forming bit of unsigned int object. It works that way with any unsigned type.
Expression ~0 is evaluated in the domain of signed int type, and then y is implicitly converted to unsigned int in x == y comparison. Apparently, on your platform the conversion produces the same unsigned int value with all value-forming bits set to 1. Hence the equality.
Initialization
unsigned int x = -4;
initializes x with some unsigned value congruent to -4 modulo UINT_MAX + 1. In comparison x == -4 the right-hand side is converted to unsigned type by the very same rules. Hence the equality.

and how is it possible, x being unsigned
This is the "usual arithmetic conversions" -- the operands on either side of the == have different types, so they must be converted to the same types first. The rule for types of int or larger when the types differ only by signedness is that unsigned wins, so this converts -4 into the unsigned equivalent value, just as it did when you assigned -4 into an unsigned integer.
For more information, see How do promotion rules work when the signedness on either side of a binary operator differ?

in int negative integers are stored in 2's complement.
suppose we have a data type say of 4 bits.
the first bit 0 represents that the integer is positive otherwise negative, so its max value is 0111 i.e 7
so 1 can be written as 0001
and for -1, it has to be written in its 2's complement, since it is negative ;
-1 = ~(0001) +1 = (1110) + 1 = 1111;
so making this data type unsigned reads -1 as 15.

Related

Why does it make a difference if left and right shift are used together in one expression or not?

I have the following code:
unsigned char x = 255;
printf("%x\n", x); // ff
unsigned char tmp = x << 7;
unsigned char y = tmp >> 7;
printf("%x\n", y); // 1
unsigned char z = (x << 7) >> 7;
printf("%x\n", z); // ff
I would have expected y and z to be the same. But they differ depending on whether a intermediary variable is used. It would be interesting to know why this is the case.
This little test is actually more subtle than it looks as the behavior is implementation defined:
unsigned char x = 255; no ambiguity here, x is an unsigned char with value 255, type unsigned char is guaranteed to have enough range to store 255.
printf("%x\n", x); This produces ff on standard output but it would be cleaner to write printf("%hhx\n", x); as printf expects an unsigned int for conversion %x, which x is not. Passing x might actually pass an int or an unsigned int argument.
unsigned char tmp = x << 7; To evaluate the expression x << 7, x being an unsigned char first undergoes the integer promotions defined in the C Standard 6.3.3.1: If an int can represent all values of the original type (as restricted by the width, for a bit-field), the value is converted to an int; otherwise, it is converted to an unsigned int. These are called the integer promotions.
So if the number of value bits in unsigned char is smaller or equal to that of int (the most common case currently being 8 vs 31), x is first promoted to an int with the same value, which is then shifted left by 7 positions. The result, 0x7f80, is guaranteed to fit in the int type, so the behavior is well defined and converting this value to type unsigned char will effectively truncate the high order bits of the value. If type unsigned char has 8 bits, the value will be 128 (0x80), but if type unsigned char has more bits, the value in tmp can be 0x180, 0x380, 0x780, 0xf80, 0x1f80, 0x3f80 or even 0x7f80.
If type unsigned char is larger than int, which can occur on rare systems where sizeof(int) == 1, x is promoted to unsigned int and the left shift is performed on this type. The value is 0x7f80U, which is guaranteed to fit in type unsigned int and storing that to tmp does not actually lose any information since type unsigned char has the same size as unsigned int. So tmp would have the value 0x7f80 in this case.
unsigned char y = tmp >> 7; The evaluation proceeds the same as above, tmp is promoted to int or unsigned int depending on the system, which preserves its value, and this value is shifted right by 7 positions, which is fully defined because 7 is less than the width of the type (int or unsigned int) and the value is positive. Depending on the number of bits of type unsigned char, the value stored in y can be 1, 3, 7, 15, 31, 63, 127 or 255, the most common architecture will have y == 1.
printf("%x\n", y); again, it would be better t write printf("%hhx\n", y); and the output may be 1 (most common case) or 3, 7, f, 1f, 3f, 7f or ff depending on the number of value bits in type unsigned char.
unsigned char z = (x << 7) >> 7; The integer promotion is performed on x as described above, the value (255) is then shifted left 7 bits as an int or an unsigned int, always producing 0x7f80 and then right shifted by 7 positions, with a final value of 0xff. This behavior is fully defined.
printf("%x\n", z); Once more, the format string should be printf("%hhx\n", z); and the output would always be ff.
Systems where bytes have more than 8 bits are becoming rare these days, but some embedded processors, such as specialized DSPs still do that. It would take a perverse system to fail when passed an unsigned char for a %x conversion specifier, but it is cleaner to either use %hhx or more portably write printf("%x\n", (unsigned)z);
Shifting by 8 instead of 7 in this example would be even more contrived. It would have undefined behavior on systems with 16-bit int and 8-bit char.
The 'intermediate' values in your last case are (full) integers, so the bits that are shifted 'out of range' of the original unsigned char type are retained, and thus they are still set when the result is converted back to a single byte.
From this C11 Draft Standard:
6.5.7 Bitwise shift operators ... 3 The integer promotions are performed on each of the operands. The type of the
result is that of the promoted left operand ...
However, in your first case, unsigned char tmp = x << 7;, the tmp loses the six 'high' bits when the resultant 'full' integer is converted (i.e. truncated) back to a single byte, giving a value of 0x80; when this is then right-shifted in unsigned char y = tmp >> 7;, the result is (as expected) 0x01.
The shift operator is not defined for the char types. The value of any char operand is converted to int and the result of the expression is converted the char type.
So, when you put the left and right shift operators in the same expression the calculation will be performed as type int (without loosing any bit), and the result will be converted to char.

Why is signed char not getting upcasted to unsigned int here?

#include <stdio.h>
int main()
{
unsigned int x =1;
signed char y = -1;
unsigned int sum = x + y;
printf("%u", sum);
}
In the above program I expected signed char to be upcasted to unsigned int and hence sum to be x + y = 1 + 2^32 -1 = 2^32. But surprisingly it prints 0.
Previously, I had tried printing (x>y) and got false (0) as the output. I can't figure out what's going on here, could someone explain how does one about casting in such cases?
It shouldn't be surprising that computing 232 as an unsigned int results in 0. On a machine with 32-bit ints, UINT_MAX is 232−1 and 232 is out of range. As with any other unsigned arithmetic, the out-of-range value is reduced modulus UINT_MAX + 1 (i.e., 232), resulting in 0.
Specifically, in the evaluation of x + y:
First, y is converted to a (signed) int, as per the "integer promotions". This doesn't change the value of y; it is still -1.
Then, as per the "usual arithmetic conversions", since unsigned int and int have the same rank, y is converted to unsigned int, making its value 232 − 1.
Finally, the addition is computed using unsigned int arithmetic. That results in 0, as above.
This exact same sequence is followed for the evaluation of x > y. Since y has been converted to an unsigned int before the comparison is evaluated, the result is (perhaps unexpectedly) false. That's why some compilers will warn about comparison between signed and unsigned values.
Also, the type of the variable being assigned to does not alter the computation. Only when the result is computed is any consideration taken of what will be done with the result. If, for example, sum had been declared unsigned long long int, the computation would be done identically and sum would still be 0. For the extra precision to be useful, you would have to first cast y to unsigned int manually, and then ensure that the addition was computed with extra precision by manually casting one of the arguments to +:
unsigned int y_as_int = y;
unsigned long long sum = x + (unsigned long long)y_as_int;

Why is a negative int greater than unsigned int? [duplicate]

This question already has answers here:
Comparison operation on unsigned and signed integers
(7 answers)
Closed 4 years ago.
int main(void)
{
unsigned int y = 10;
int x = – 4;
if (x > y)
Printf("x is greater");
else
Printf("y is greater");
getch();
return (0);
}
Output: x is greater
I thought the output would be y is greater since it is unsigned. What's the reason behind this?
Because the int value is promoted to an unsigned int. specifically 0xFFFFFFFC on a 32-bit machine, which as an unsigned int is 4294967292, considerably larger than 10
C99 6.3.1.1-p2
If an int can represent all values of the original type (as restricted by the width, for a bit-field), the value is converted to an int; otherwise, it is converted to an unsigned int. These are called the integer promotions. All other types are unchanged by the integer promotions.
To perform the conversion:
C99 6.3.1.3-p2
Otherwise, if the new type is unsigned, the value is converted by repeatedly adding or subtracting one more than the maximum value that can be represented in the new type until the value is in the range of the new type.
Which basically means "add UINT_MAX+1" (as I read it, anyway).
Regarding why the promotion was to the unsigned int side; precedence:
C99 6.3.1.8-p1
...Otherwise, if the operand that has unsigned integer type has rank greater or equal to the rank of the type of the other operand, then the operand with signed integer type is converted to the type of the operand with unsigned integer type.
Otherwise, if the type of the operand with signed integer type can represent all of the values of the type of the operand with unsigned integer type, then the operand with unsigned integer type is converted to the type of the operand with signed integer type.
Which tells me int vs. unsigned char should work as expected.
Test
int main()
{
int x = -4;
unsigned int y = 10;
unsigned char z = 10;
if (x > y)
printf("x>y\n");
else
printf("x<y\n");
if (x > z)
printf("x>z\n");
else
printf("x<z\n");
return 0;
}
Output
x>y
x<z
Well look at that.
A comparison between a signed and an unsigned value will be made in "unsigned space". I.e., the signed value will be converted to unsigned by adding UINT_MAX + 1. In implementation using the 2-complement for negative values, no special handling of the values is required under the hood.
In this example, the -4 is turned into a 0x100000000-4 = 0xFFFFFFFC which is clearly > 10.
When you compare two values in C, they both must be of the same type. In this case (int and unsigned int) the int value will be converted to an unsigned int first.
Second, unsigned integer arithmetic in C is done modulo the maximum value of that type + 1 (that is, it "loops around" so UINT_MAX + 1 is 0 again and vice versa). Therefore converting negative values to unsigned results in very large numbers.
The relevant section in the standard says:
6.3.1.3 Signed and unsigned integers
2
Otherwise, if the new type is unsigned, the value is converted by repeatedly adding or
subtracting one more than the maximum value that can be represented in the new type
until the value is in the range of the new type.
When you compare an int and an unsigned int the int is converted to unsigned int.
The convertion of an int to an unsigned int is done by adding UINT_MAX+1 (note that your int is negative). So actually you are comparing:
if (-3 + UINT_MAX > 10) //Since -4 is converted to UINT_MAX+1-4
Which is true.
The first bit of an int value is used to define if it's a positive or a negative one. (1 = negative, 0 positive)
Your both variable are cast into unsigned int before comparison where the 1 in the first bit will be interpreted as part of your number.
this code should work fine :
int main(void)
{
unsigned int y = 10;
int x = – 4;
if (x > (int) y)
Printf("x is greater");
else
Printf ("y is greater");
getch ( );
return (0);
}
int x=-4 (2's complement of 4 is 1111 1100 =252) and unsigned int y=10 is(0000 1010 =10) so 252 >10 so -4 is greater than 10.

What type-conversions are happening?

#include "stdio.h"
int main()
{
int x = -13701;
unsigned int y = 3;
signed short z = x / y;
printf("z = %d\n", z);
return 0;
}
I would expect the answer to be -4567. I am getting "z = 17278".
Why does a promotion of these numbers result in 17278?
I executed this in Code Pad.
The hidden type conversions are:
signed short z = (signed short) (((unsigned int) x) / y);
When you mix signed and unsigned types the unsigned ones win. x is converted to unsigned int, divided by 3, and then that result is down-converted to (signed) short. With 32-bit integers:
(unsigned) -13701 == (unsigned) 0xFFFFCA7B // Bit pattern
(unsigned) 0xFFFFCA7B == (unsigned) 4294953595 // Re-interpret as unsigned
(unsigned) 4294953595 / 3 == (unsigned) 1431651198 // Divide by 3
(unsigned) 1431651198 == (unsigned) 0x5555437E // Bit pattern of that result
(short) 0x5555437E == (short) 0x437E // Strip high 16 bits
(short) 0x437E == (short) 17278 // Re-interpret as short
By the way, the signed keyword is unnecessary. signed short is a longer way of saying short. The only type that needs an explicit signed is char. char can be signed or unsigned depending on the platform; all other types are always signed by default.
Short answer: the division first promotes x to unsigned. Only then the result is cast back to a signed short.
Long answer: read this SO thread.
The problems comes from the unsigned int y. Indeed, x/y becomes unsigned. It works with :
#include "stdio.h"
int main()
{
int x = -13701;
signed int y = 3;
signed short z = x / y;
printf("z = %d\n", z);
return 0;
}
Every time you mix "large" signed and unsigned values in additive and multiplicative arithmetic operations, unsigned type "wins" and the evaluation is performed in the domain of the unsigned type ("large" means int and larger). If your original signed value was negative, it first will be converted to positive unsigned value in accordance with the rules of signed-to-unsigned conversions. In your case -13701 will turn into UINT_MAX + 1 - 13701 and the result will be used as the dividend.
Note that the result of signed-to-unsigned conversion on a typical 32-bit int platform will result in unsigned value 4294953595. After division by 3 you'll get 1431651198. This value is too large to be forced into a short object on a platform with 16-bit short type. An attempt to do that results in implementation-defined behavior. So, if the properties of your platform are the same as in my assumptions, then your code produces implementation-defined behavior. Formally speaking, the "meaningless" 17278 value you are getting is nothing more than a specific manifestation of that implementation-defined behavior. It is possible, that if you compiled your code with overflow checking enabled (if your compiler supports them), it would trap on the assignment.

Why do unsigned int x = -1 and int y = ~0 have the same binary representation?

In the following code segment what will be:
the result of function
value of x
value of y
{
unsigned int x=-1;
int y;
y = ~0;
if(x == y)
printf("same");
else
printf("not same");
}
a. same, MAXINT, -1
b. not same, MAXINT, -MAXINT
c. same , MAXUINT, -1
d. same, MAXUINT, MAXUINT
e. not same, MAXINT, MAXUINT
Can someone explain me how its works or can just explain the snippet??
I know it's about two's complement n etc..
What is the significance of MAXINT and -1 ?
It is because of unsigned int and int thing - am I right ?
unsigned int x=-1;
1 is an integer literal and has type int (because it fits in an int). Unary - applied to an int causes no further promotion so -1 is an int with value -1.
When converted to an unsigned int modulo 2^N arithmetic is used where N is the number of value bits in an unsigned int. x has the value 2^N - 1 which is UINT_MAX (What's MAX_UNIT?).
int y;
y = ~0;
Again 0 is type int, in C all the allowed representations of int must have all the value bits of an int representing 0 as 0. Again no promotion happens for unary ~ so ~0 is an int with all value bits being 1. What it's value is is implementation dependent but it is negative (the sign bit will be set) so definitely neither of UINT_MAX or INT_MAX. This value is stored in y unchanged.
if(x == y)
printf("same");
else
printf("not same");
In this comparison y will be converted to unsigned int in order to be compared with x which is already an unsigned int. As y has an implementation value, the value after conversion to unsigned int is still implementation defined (although the conversion itself is modulo 2^N and fully specified). The result of the comparison is still implementation defined.
So in conclusion:
implementation defined, UINT_MAX, implementation defined
In practice on ones' complement:
not same, UINT_MAX, -0 (aka 0)
sign plus magnitude:
not same, UINT_MAX, INT_MIN
two's complement:
same, UINT_MAX, -1
Its pretty easy. The twos complement representation of -1 is 0xFFFFFFFF. Hence that is what x contains.
The complement operator (~) flips all the bits. So the complement of 0 is a 32-bit number with all the bits set to 1 or 0xFFFFFFFF.
Edit: As pointed out int he comments. The answer is not A. If it was then it would be saying 0x7FFFFFFF and 0xFFFFFFFF are the same. They're not. The real answer is C (Assuming MAXUNIT is a typo ;)).
If you run this program, you will see that the answer a is wrong and c is the correct answer:
#include <stdio.h>
#include <limits.h>
int main() {
unsigned int x=-1;
int y;
y = ~0;
if(x == y)
printf("same\n");
if(x==INT_MAX) printf("INT_MAX\n");
if(x==UINT_MAX) printf("UINT_MAX\n");
else
printf("not same");
return 0;
}
It's because of twos-complement
The flipping of the bits results in a bit pattern that matches -1
Since in the first unsigned int, you put -1, but from the unsigned int point of view it is 0xFFFFFFFF (this is how negative integers are stored into a computer); in the second case the bitwise not does not look at the "kind" at all and "transform" 0 into 1 and viceversa, so all zeros of 0 becomes 1 (looking at bits), so you obtain 0xFFFFFFFF.
The next question is, why comparing an unsigned integer with a signed integer does not distinguish them? (numerically 4294967295 is not equal to -1 of course, even though their representation in a computer is the same). Indeed it could, but clearly C does not mandate such a distinction, and it is "natural", since processor aren't able to do it of their own (I am not sure about this last sentence being always true, ... but it is for most processor): to take into account this distinction in asm, you have to add extra code.
From the C point of view, you have to decide if to cast int into unsigned int, or signed int into unsigned int. But a negative number can't be cast into a unsigned one, of course, and on the other hand, an unsigned number could cause overflow (e.g. for 4294967295 you need a 64bit register (or a 33bit regster!) to be able to have it and still be able to calculate its negative value)...
So likely the most natural thing is to avoid strange casting, and permit a "cpu like" comparison, which in this case lead to 0xFFFFFFFF (-1 on 32 bit) compared to 0xFFFFFFFF (~0 on 32bit), which are the same, and more in genereal one can be considered as MAXUINT (the maximum unsigned integer that can be hold) and the other as -1. (Take a look at your machine limits.h include to check it)

Resources