Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.java.programmer > #7540
| Path | csiph.com!x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net!usenet.pasdenom.info!news.albasani.net!.POSTED!not-for-mail |
|---|---|
| From | Jan Burse <janburse@fastmail.fm> |
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.java.programmer |
| Subject | BitSet vs BigInteger (false Android doc) |
| Date | Fri, 02 Sep 2011 21:48:06 +0200 |
| Organization | albasani.net |
| Lines | 35 |
| Message-ID | <j3rbtv$d5g$1@news.albasani.net> (permalink) |
| Mime-Version | 1.0 |
| Content-Type | text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15; format=flowed |
| Content-Transfer-Encoding | 7bit |
| X-Trace | news.albasani.net 0j8mSEE4XzYLTOi2RaOh/6PdAP29hToE4UX6bLdWqCGa/5HsUuDZm97mqjjJd/I0FVqcV3FpXBtGkxUGzr0iaQ== |
| NNTP-Posting-Date | Fri, 2 Sep 2011 19:48:15 +0000 (UTC) |
| Injection-Info | news.albasani.net; logging-data="mYykoIupD3JShoa9s/IsFS9T+IT6wHqfj7p2GJAcJJcqClS/XW7dIkXFYTHZALD/cBfVP1hNbNVCGYL9DQ/9II0udTlQwRcXGzUkfeKzjueVp6H4DOlFYKcEl0cPVLhW"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@albasani.net" |
| User-Agent | Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:6.0.1) Gecko/20110830 Firefox/6.0.1 SeaMonkey/2.3.1 |
| Cancel-Lock | sha1:YToxqR9evdHz8fIPGWNbe5nsbLM= |
| Xref | x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net comp.lang.java.programmer:7540 |
Show key headers only | View raw
Dear All,
Just notice the following note on Android for
java.lang.BigInteger:
Slow Two's Complement Bitwise Operations
This API includes operations for bitwise operations
in two's complement representation. Two's complement
is not the internal representation used by this
implementation, so such methods may be inefficient.
Use BitSet for high-performance bitwise operations
on arbitrarily-large sequences of bits.
But why should be BitSet any faster than BigInteger? Both
BitSet and BigInteger don't use some sparse representation.
They just allocate an array, in the case of BitSet its a long
array, and in the case of BigInteger int array.
The BigInteger sign does not slow down the process in any way.
Its just that the highest int of the BigInteger carries a sign,
which is arbirarily extended to the left. So BigInteger can
represent:
....1xxxxxx
With an infinite sequence of 1's to the left. And then do
boolean operation. But there is practically no overhead
for that. But what I saw is that BitSet is not immutable,
so this could be a reason. But the two's complement is
not an issue, this is just rubbish.
Right?
Bye
Back to comp.lang.java.programmer | Previous | Next — Next in thread | Find similar
BitSet vs BigInteger (false Android doc) Jan Burse <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2011-09-02 21:48 +0200
Re: BitSet vs BigInteger (false Android doc) Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2011-09-02 16:23 -0400
Re: BitSet vs BigInteger (false Android doc) Patricia Shanahan <pats@acm.org> - 2011-09-02 13:34 -0700
Re: BitSet vs BigInteger (false Android doc) Jan Burse <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2011-09-02 22:51 +0200
Re: BitSet vs BigInteger (false Android doc) Patricia Shanahan <pats@acm.org> - 2011-09-02 18:58 -0700
Re: BitSet vs BigInteger (false Android doc) Jan Burse <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2011-09-03 20:15 +0200
Re: BitSet vs BigInteger (false Android doc) Patricia Shanahan <pats@acm.org> - 2011-09-03 12:37 -0700
Re: BitSet vs BigInteger (false Android doc) Jan Burse <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2011-09-03 22:46 +0200
Re: BitSet vs BigInteger (false Android doc) Patricia Shanahan <pats@acm.org> - 2011-09-03 16:32 -0700
Re: BitSet vs BigInteger (false Android doc) Jan Burse <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2011-09-04 02:58 +0200
Re: BitSet vs BigInteger (false Android doc) Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2011-09-05 19:32 -0400
Re: BitSet vs BigInteger (false Android doc) Jan Burse <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2011-09-06 08:58 +0200
Re: BitSet vs BigInteger (false Android doc) Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2011-09-06 00:41 -0700
Re: BitSet vs BigInteger (false Android doc) Jan Burse <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2011-09-06 11:57 +0200
Re: BitSet vs BigInteger (false Android doc) Jan Burse <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2011-09-06 12:12 +0200
Re: BitSet vs BigInteger (false Android doc) Jan Burse <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2011-09-06 12:44 +0200
Re: BitSet vs BigInteger (false Android doc) Jan Burse <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2011-09-06 12:02 +0200
Re: BitSet vs BigInteger (false Android doc) Patricia Shanahan <pats@acm.org> - 2011-09-06 13:38 -0700
Re: BitSet vs BigInteger (false Android doc) Patricia Shanahan <pats@acm.org> - 2011-09-06 10:33 -0700
Re: BitSet vs BigInteger (false Android doc) Jan Burse <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2011-09-06 22:28 +0200
Re: BitSet vs BigInteger (false Android doc) Jan Burse <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2011-09-06 22:41 +0200
Re: BitSet vs BigInteger (false Android doc) Patricia Shanahan <pats@acm.org> - 2011-09-06 14:34 -0700
Re: BitSet vs BigInteger (false Android doc) Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2011-09-06 14:51 -0700
Re: BitSet vs BigInteger (false Android doc) Jan Burse <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2011-09-07 00:33 +0200
Re: BitSet vs BigInteger (false Android doc) Jan Burse <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2011-09-07 00:40 +0200
Re: BitSet vs BigInteger (false Android doc) Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2011-09-05 19:26 -0400
Re: BitSet vs BigInteger (false Android doc) Robert Klemme <shortcutter@googlemail.com> - 2011-09-03 17:01 +0200
Re: BitSet vs BigInteger (false Android doc) Jan Burse <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2011-09-02 22:49 +0200
Re: BitSet vs BigInteger (false Android doc) Gene Wirchenko <genew@ocis.net> - 2011-09-02 14:48 -0700
Re: BitSet vs BigInteger (false Android doc) Eric Sosman <esosman@ieee-dot-org.invalid> - 2011-09-03 13:54 -0400
csiph-web