 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Bitwise Encoding
Please support our Java advertiser: Programming Forums - DaniWeb Sister Site
 |
•
•
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 7,628
Reputation: 
Solved Threads: 468
> 0-5 : 4 bits
I wonder how you came up with 4. ;-)
@llemes4011
Coming up with your own serialization mechanism is hard; continue if you are doing this for fun but do remember that there are many other good binary serialization formats out there which can lessen your work and reduce the agony. A comparison of various serialization libraries can be found here.
I wonder how you came up with 4. ;-)
@llemes4011
Coming up with your own serialization mechanism is hard; continue if you are doing this for fun but do remember that there are many other good binary serialization formats out there which can lessen your work and reduce the agony. A comparison of various serialization libraries can be found here.
Last edited by ~s.o.s~; Jul 11th, 2009 at 12:04 pm.
I don't accept change; I don't deserve to live.
•
•
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 982
Reputation:
Solved Threads: 145
Posting Shark
•
•
•
•
Originally Posted by ~s.o.s~ 
> 0-5 : 4 bits
I wonder how you came up with 4. ;-)
Sorry OP, subtract 1 bit from my previous post.
J.
•
•
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 207
Reputation:
Solved Threads: 13
Posting Whiz in Training
•
•
•
•
Originally Posted by JamesCherrill
ps I hope you need to store millions of these, because otherwize it's all a waste of time. A few bytes here or there don't matter today.
•
•
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 982
Reputation:
Solved Threads: 145
Posting Shark
Well, I would definitely say that for 40,000 it would be worth using byte and short (as per my previous post), but not worth trying to pack the bits any tighter.
•
•
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 7,628
Reputation:
Solved Threads: 468
> closer to around 40,000
40,000 is nothing, unless you have some specifications which you would need to meet and you have *confirmed* that doing things your way is much faster than the other simpler approaches.
IMO just go with the normal way of doing things i.e. writing data as comma separated values. If you are feeling adventurous, rather screw around with an embeddable database than get involved with all the bit-fiddling. Optimize when needed and that too after profiling; premature optimization is the root of all evil.
40,000 is nothing, unless you have some specifications which you would need to meet and you have *confirmed* that doing things your way is much faster than the other simpler approaches.
IMO just go with the normal way of doing things i.e. writing data as comma separated values. If you are feeling adventurous, rather screw around with an embeddable database than get involved with all the bit-fiddling. Optimize when needed and that too after profiling; premature optimization is the root of all evil.
I don't accept change; I don't deserve to live.
•
•
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 830
Reputation:
Solved Threads: 94
Practically a Posting Shark
field1(int) range = 0 to 5 {3}
field2(float) range = 0.00 to 30.00 (need 2 sig-figs) {5+7=12}
field3(float) range = 0.00 to 30.00 (need 2 sig-figs) {5+7=12}
field4(int) range = 0 to 100 {3}
So 30 bits total. 32-bit integer so 2 spare bits. What fields should those two bits be given to for future expansion?
so 32/192 compaction ratio.
field2(float) range = 0.00 to 30.00 (need 2 sig-figs) {5+7=12}
field3(float) range = 0.00 to 30.00 (need 2 sig-figs) {5+7=12}
field4(int) range = 0 to 100 {3}
So 30 bits total. 32-bit integer so 2 spare bits. What fields should those two bits be given to for future expansion?
so 32/192 compaction ratio.
•
•
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 982
Reputation:
Solved Threads: 145
Posting Shark
Hey! Now it's my turn!
> 0-100 : 3 bits
I wonder how you came up with 3. ;-)
Anyway I agree with sos. Unless you need to store this data on punched cards, the odd few 10k bytes here or there is pretty much irrelevant.
> 0-100 : 3 bits
I wonder how you came up with 3. ;-)
Anyway I agree with sos. Unless you need to store this data on punched cards, the odd few 10k bytes here or there is pretty much irrelevant.
|
Similar Threads
- Internet Explorer SP2 Encoding Error (Web Browsers)
- Explorer Encoding (Web Browsers)
- Encoding/Decoding (C)
- Bitwise AND (C++)
- Bitwise operators (C)
Other Threads in the Java Forum
- Previous Thread: repaint won't call paintComponent(Graphics )
- Next Thread: illegal start of expression
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
You need to join our community in order to build your list of favorite forums. You can visit the forum index for a listing of all forums.
Latest Java Posts
- Today's Posts
- Unanswered Threads
Related Forum Features
android api applet application applications array arrays automation balls bank binary bluetooth business chat class classes clear client code codesnippet collections component database db defaultmethod development dice dragging draw ebook eclipse error event exception formatingtextintooltipjava fractal game givemetehcodez graphics gui hql html ide image infinite input integer invokingapacheantprogrammatically j2me java javaprojects jni jpanel julia linux list loop looping map method methods mobile mysql netbeans newbie numbers openjavafx oracle parameter php print problem program programming project recursion repositories scanner screen scrollbar server set size sms sort sorting sql sqlserver state storm string sun superclass swing swt text-file threads time tree windows
