Counting the ones in the binary representation of a number in C# [on hold]

up vote
-1
down vote

favorite

I want to count the 1s in the binary representation of a number (input) in C#.

Which is more readable:

Enumerable

   .Range(0, 32)

   .Aggregate(0, (acc, i) => acc + ((input >> i) & 1));

Convert.ToString(input, 2).Count(x => x == '1');

edited yesterday

200_success

127k15149412

asked yesterday

K. Gkinis

1175

put on hold as off-topic by t3chb0t, Toby Speight, IEatBagels, Mast, Ismael Miguel 20 hours ago

This question appears to be off-topic. The users who voted to close gave this specific reason:

"Lacks concrete context: Code Review requires concrete code from a project, with sufficient context for reviewers to understand how that code is used. Pseudocode, stub code, hypothetical code, obfuscated code, and generic best practices are outside the scope of this site." – t3chb0t, Toby Speight, IEatBagels, Mast

If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.

Why the downvote?
– K. Gkinis
yesterday

1

I can't speak for the person that downvoted, but your question is getting some close-votes for 'lack of context' - it would help to know in what context this code is used. Either way, I'd say that the more readable solution is to encapsulate this logic in a BitCount(int input) method. Not only does it make the intent clearer at call-sites, it also allows you to swap for a more efficient approach if the need arises.
– Pieter Witvoet
23 hours ago

Unfortunately, there is no better context. It's not actual code, it's more of an argument over readability over an exercise, so maybe it's too broad.
– K. Gkinis
21 hours ago

add a comment |

up vote
-1
down vote

favorite

I want to count the 1s in the binary representation of a number (input) in C#.

Which is more readable:

Enumerable

   .Range(0, 32)

   .Aggregate(0, (acc, i) => acc + ((input >> i) & 1));

Convert.ToString(input, 2).Count(x => x == '1');

edited yesterday

200_success

127k15149412

asked yesterday

K. Gkinis

1175

put on hold as off-topic by t3chb0t, Toby Speight, IEatBagels, Mast, Ismael Miguel 20 hours ago

This question appears to be off-topic. The users who voted to close gave this specific reason:

"Lacks concrete context: Code Review requires concrete code from a project, with sufficient context for reviewers to understand how that code is used. Pseudocode, stub code, hypothetical code, obfuscated code, and generic best practices are outside the scope of this site." – t3chb0t, Toby Speight, IEatBagels, Mast

If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.

Why the downvote?
– K. Gkinis
yesterday

1

I can't speak for the person that downvoted, but your question is getting some close-votes for 'lack of context' - it would help to know in what context this code is used. Either way, I'd say that the more readable solution is to encapsulate this logic in a BitCount(int input) method. Not only does it make the intent clearer at call-sites, it also allows you to swap for a more efficient approach if the need arises.
– Pieter Witvoet
23 hours ago

Unfortunately, there is no better context. It's not actual code, it's more of an argument over readability over an exercise, so maybe it's too broad.
– K. Gkinis
21 hours ago

add a comment |

up vote
-1
down vote

favorite

I want to count the 1s in the binary representation of a number (input) in C#.

Which is more readable:

Enumerable

   .Range(0, 32)

   .Aggregate(0, (acc, i) => acc + ((input >> i) & 1));

Convert.ToString(input, 2).Count(x => x == '1');

edited yesterday

200_success

127k15149412

asked yesterday

K. Gkinis

1175

I want to count the 1s in the binary representation of a number (input) in C#.

Which is more readable:

Enumerable

   .Range(0, 32)

   .Aggregate(0, (acc, i) => acc + ((input >> i) & 1));

Convert.ToString(input, 2).Count(x => x == '1');

c# comparative-review linq

edited yesterday

200_success

127k15149412

asked yesterday

K. Gkinis

1175

edited yesterday

200_success

127k15149412

asked yesterday

K. Gkinis

1175

edited yesterday

200_success

127k15149412

edited yesterday

200_success

127k15149412

edited yesterday

200_success

127k15149412

asked yesterday

K. Gkinis

1175

asked yesterday

K. Gkinis

1175

asked yesterday

K. Gkinis

1175

put on hold as off-topic by t3chb0t, Toby Speight, IEatBagels, Mast, Ismael Miguel 20 hours ago

This question appears to be off-topic. The users who voted to close gave this specific reason:

"Lacks concrete context: Code Review requires concrete code from a project, with sufficient context for reviewers to understand how that code is used. Pseudocode, stub code, hypothetical code, obfuscated code, and generic best practices are outside the scope of this site." – t3chb0t, Toby Speight, IEatBagels, Mast

If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.

put on hold as off-topic by t3chb0t, Toby Speight, IEatBagels, Mast, Ismael Miguel 20 hours ago

This question appears to be off-topic. The users who voted to close gave this specific reason:

"Lacks concrete context: Code Review requires concrete code from a project, with sufficient context for reviewers to understand how that code is used. Pseudocode, stub code, hypothetical code, obfuscated code, and generic best practices are outside the scope of this site." – t3chb0t, Toby Speight, IEatBagels, Mast

If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.

Why the downvote?
– K. Gkinis
yesterday

1

I can't speak for the person that downvoted, but your question is getting some close-votes for 'lack of context' - it would help to know in what context this code is used. Either way, I'd say that the more readable solution is to encapsulate this logic in a BitCount(int input) method. Not only does it make the intent clearer at call-sites, it also allows you to swap for a more efficient approach if the need arises.
– Pieter Witvoet
23 hours ago

Unfortunately, there is no better context. It's not actual code, it's more of an argument over readability over an exercise, so maybe it's too broad.
– K. Gkinis
21 hours ago

add a comment |

Why the downvote?
– K. Gkinis
yesterday

1

I can't speak for the person that downvoted, but your question is getting some close-votes for 'lack of context' - it would help to know in what context this code is used. Either way, I'd say that the more readable solution is to encapsulate this logic in a BitCount(int input) method. Not only does it make the intent clearer at call-sites, it also allows you to swap for a more efficient approach if the need arises.
– Pieter Witvoet
23 hours ago

Unfortunately, there is no better context. It's not actual code, it's more of an argument over readability over an exercise, so maybe it's too broad.
– K. Gkinis
21 hours ago

Why the downvote?
– K. Gkinis
yesterday

I can't speak for the person that downvoted, but your question is getting some close-votes for 'lack of context' - it would help to know in what context this code is used. Either way, I'd say that the more readable solution is to encapsulate this logic in a BitCount(int input) method. Not only does it make the intent clearer at call-sites, it also allows you to swap for a more efficient approach if the need arises.
– Pieter Witvoet
23 hours ago

Unfortunately, there is no better context. It's not actual code, it's more of an argument over readability over an exercise, so maybe it's too broad.
– K. Gkinis
21 hours ago

add a comment |

active

oldest

votes

This page is only for reference, If you need detailed information, please check here

搜尋此網誌

Krdytkyu