Can we access randomly a part of byte.I mean can i access three bits of a bit randomnly without using BitArray and accessing by byte.
Is there any possibility of accessing bit from byte and if not why it is not possible to access it and is it depends on any criteria
You can use the Bitwise And (&) operator in order to read a specific bit from a byte. I'll give some examples by using the 0b prefix, which in C# allows you to write binary literals in your code.
So suppose you have the following byte value:
byte val = 0b10010100; // val = 148 (in decimal)
byte testBits = 0b00000100; // set ONLY the BITS you want to test here...
if ( val & testBits != 0 ) // bitwise and will return 0 if the bit is NOT SET.
Console.WriteLine("The bit is set!");
else
Console.WriteLine("The bit is not set....");
Here's a method for you to test any bit in a given byte, which uses the Left-Shift operator applied to the number 1 in order to generate a binary number which is able to be used for testing against any arbitrary bit in the given byte:
public static int readBit(byte val, int bitPos)
{
if ((val & (1 << bitPos)) != 0)
return 1;
return 0;
}
You can use this method to print which bits are set in a given byte:
byte val = 0b10010100;
for (int i = 0; i < 8; i++)
{
int bitValue = readBit(val, i);
Console.WriteLine($"Bit {i} = {bitValue}");
}
The output from the code above should be:
Bit 0 = 0
Bit 1 = 0
Bit 2 = 1
Bit 3 = 0
Bit 4 = 1
Bit 5 = 0
Bit 6 = 0
Bit 7 = 1
you can use bit shifting
var bitNumber = 0;
var firstBit = (b & (1 << bitNumber)) != 0 ;
we can convert this to extension method
public static class ByteExtensions
{
public static bool GetBit(this byte b, int bitNumber) =>
(b & (1 << bitNumber)) != 0;
}
then
byte b = 7;
var bit0 = b.GetBit(3);
Related
I have a requirement to encode a byte array from an short integer value
The encoding rules are
The bits representing the integer are bits 0 - 13
bit 14 is set if the number is negative
bit 15 is always 1.
I know I can get the integer into a byte array using BitConverter
byte[] roll = BitConverter.GetBytes(x);
But I cant find how to meet my requirement
Anyone know how to do this?
You should use Bitwise Operators.
Solution is something like this:
Int16 x = 7;
if(x < 0)
{
Int16 mask14 = 16384; // 0b0100000000000000;
x = (Int16)(x | mask14);
}
Int16 mask15 = -32768; // 0b1000000000000000;
x = (Int16)(x | mask15);
byte[] roll = BitConverter.GetBytes(x);
You cannot rely on GetBytes for negative numbers since it complements the bits and that is not what you need.
Instead you need to do bounds checking to make sure the number is representable, then use GetBytes on the absolute value of the given number.
The method's parameter is 'short' so we GetBytes returns a byte array with the size of 2 (you don't need more than 16 bits).
The rest is in the comments below:
static readonly int MAX_UNSIGNED_14_BIT = 16383;// 2^14-1
public static byte[] EncodeSigned14Bit(short x)
{
var absoluteX = Math.Abs(x);
if (absoluteX > MAX_UNSIGNED_14_BIT) throw new ArgumentException($"{nameof(x)} is too large and cannot be represented");
byte[] roll = BitConverter.GetBytes(absoluteX);
if (x < 0)
{
roll[1] |= 0b01000000; //x is negative, set 14th bit
}
roll[1] |= 0b10000000; // 15th bit is always set
return roll;
}
static void Main(string[] args)
{
// testing some values
var r1 = EncodeSigned14Bit(16383); // r1[0] = 255, r1[1] = 191
var r2 = EncodeSigned14Bit(-16383); // r2[0] = 255, r2[1] = 255
}
I have integer array and I need to convert it to byte array
but I need to take (only and just only) first 11 bit of each element of the هinteger array
and then convert it to a byte array
I tried this code
// ***********convert integer values to byte values
//***********to avoid the left zero padding on the byte array
// *********** first step : convert to binary string
// ***********second step : convert binary string to byte array
// *********** first step
string ByteString = Convert.ToString(IntArray[0], 2).PadLeft(11,'0');
for (int i = 1; i < IntArray.Length; i++)
ByteString = ByteString + Convert.ToString(IntArray[i], 2).PadLeft(11, '0');
// ***********second step
int numOfBytes = ByteString.Length / 8;
byte[] bytes = new byte[numOfBytes];
for (int i = 0; i < numOfBytes; ++i)
{
bytes[i] = Convert.ToByte(ByteString.Substring(8 * i, 8), 2);
}
But it takes too long time (if the file size large , the code takes more than 1 minute)
I need a very very fast code (very few milliseconds only )
can any one help me ?
Basically, you're going to be doing a lot of shifting and masking. The exact nature of that depends on the layout you want. If we assume that we pack little-endian from each int, appending on the left, so two 11-bit integers with positions:
abcdefghijk lmnopqrstuv
become the 8-bit chunks:
defghijk rstuvabc 00lmnopq
(i.e. take the lowest 8 bits of the first integer, which leaves 3 left over, so pack those into the low 3 bits of the next byte, then take the lowest 5 bits of the second integer, then finally the remaining 6 bits, padding with zero), then something like this should work:
using System;
using System.Linq;
static class Program
{
static string AsBinary(int val) => Convert.ToString(val, 2).PadLeft(11, '0');
static string AsBinary(byte val) => Convert.ToString(val, 2).PadLeft(8, '0');
static void Main()
{
int[] source = new int[1432];
var rand = new Random(123456);
for (int i = 0; i < source.Length; i++)
source[i] = rand.Next(0, 2047); // 11 bits
// Console.WriteLine(string.Join(" ", source.Take(5).Select(AsBinary)));
var raw = Encode(source);
// Console.WriteLine(string.Join(" ", raw.Take(6).Select(AsBinary)));
var clone = Decode(raw);
// now prove that it worked OK
if (source.Length != clone.Length)
{
Console.WriteLine($"Length: {source.Length} vs {clone.Length}");
}
else
{
int failCount = 0;
for (int i = 0; i < source.Length; i++)
{
if (source[i] != clone[i] && failCount++ == 0)
{
Console.WriteLine($"{i}: {source[i]} vs {clone[i]}");
}
}
Console.WriteLine($"Errors: {failCount}");
}
}
static byte[] Encode(int[] source)
{
long bits = source.Length * 11;
int len = (int)(bits / 8);
if ((bits % 8) != 0) len++;
byte[] arr = new byte[len];
int bitOffset = 0, index = 0;
for (int i = 0; i < source.Length; i++)
{
// note: this encodes little-endian
int val = source[i] & 2047;
int bitsLeft = 11;
if(bitOffset != 0)
{
val = val << bitOffset;
arr[index++] |= (byte)val;
bitsLeft -= (8 - bitOffset);
val >>= 8;
}
if(bitsLeft >= 8)
{
arr[index++] = (byte)val;
bitsLeft -= 8;
val >>= 8;
}
if(bitsLeft != 0)
{
arr[index] = (byte)val;
}
bitOffset = bitsLeft;
}
return arr;
}
private static int[] Decode(byte[] source)
{
int bits = source.Length * 8;
int len = (int)(bits / 11);
// note no need to worry about remaining chunks - no ambiguity since 11 > 8
int[] arr = new int[len];
int bitOffset = 0, index = 0;
for(int i = 0; i < source.Length; i++)
{
int val = source[i] << bitOffset;
int bitsLeftInVal = 11 - bitOffset;
if(bitsLeftInVal > 8)
{
arr[index] |= val;
bitOffset += 8;
}
else if(bitsLeftInVal == 8)
{
arr[index++] |= val;
bitOffset = 0;
}
else
{
arr[index++] |= (val & 2047);
if(index != arr.Length) arr[index] = val >> 11;
bitOffset = 8 - bitsLeftInVal;
}
}
return arr;
}
}
If you need a different layout you'll need to tweak it.
This encodes 512 MiB in just over a second on my machine.
Overview to the Encode method:
The first thing is does is pre-calculate the amount of space that is going to be required, and allocate the output buffer; since each input contributes 11 bits to the output, this is just some modulo math:
long bits = source.Length * 11;
int len = (int)(bits / 8);
if ((bits % 8) != 0) len++;
byte[] arr = new byte[len];
We know the output position won't match the input, and we know we're going to be starting each 11-bit chunk at different positions in bytes each time, so allocate variables for those, and loop over the input:
int bitOffset = 0, index = 0;
for (int i = 0; i < source.Length; i++)
{
...
}
return arr;
So: taking each input in turn (where the input is the value at position i), take the low 11 bits of the value - and observe that we have 11 bits (of this value) still to write:
int val = source[i] & 2047;
int bitsLeft = 11;
Now, if the current output value is partially written (i.e. bitOffset != 0), we should deal with that first. The amount of space left in the current output is 8 - bitOffset. Since we always have 11 input bits we don't need to worry about having more space than values to fill, so: left-shift our value by bitOffset (pads on the right with bitOffset zeros, as a binary operation), and "or" the lowest 8 bits of this with the output byte. Essentially this says "if bitOffset is 3, write the 5 low bits of val into the 5 high bits of the output buffer"; finally, fixup the values: increment our write position, record that we have fewer bits of the current value still to write, and use right-shift to discard the 8 low bits of val (which is made of bitOffset zeros and 8 - bitOffset "real" bits):
if(bitOffset != 0)
{
val = val << bitOffset;
arr[index++] |= (byte)val;
bitsLeft -= (8 - bitOffset);
val >>= 8;
}
The next question is: do we have (at least) an entire byte of data left? We might not, if bitOffset was 1 for example (so we'll have written 7 bits already, leaving just 4). If we do, we can just stamp that down and increment the write position - then once again track how many are left and throw away the low 8 bits:
if(bitsLeft >= 8)
{
arr[index++] = (byte)val;
bitsLeft -= 8;
val >>= 8;
}
And it is possible that we've still got some left-over; for example, if bitOffset was 7 we'll have written 1 bit in the first chunk, 8 bits in the second, leaving 2 more to write - or if bitOffset was 0 we won't have written anything in the first chunk, 8 in the second, leaving 3 left to write. So, stamp down whatever is left, but do not increment the write position - we've written to the low bits, but the next value might need to write to the high bits. Finally, update bitOffset to be however many low bits we wrote in the last step (which could be zero):
if(bitsLeft != 0)
{
arr[index] = (byte)val;
}
bitOffset = bitsLeft;
The Decode operation is the reverse of this logic - again, calculate the sizes and prepare the state:
int bits = source.Length * 8;
int len = (int)(bits / 11);
int[] arr = new int[len];
int bitOffset = 0, index = 0;
Now loop over the input:
for(int i = 0; i < source.Length; i++)
{
...
}
return arr;
Now, bitOffset is the start position that we want to write to in the current 11-bit value, so if we start at the start, it will be 0 on the first byte, then 8; 3 bits of the second byte join with the first 11-bit integer, so the 5 bits become part of the second - so bitOffset is 5 on the 3rd byte, etc. We can calculate the number of bits left in the current integer by subtracting from 11:
int val = source[i] << bitOffset;
int bitsLeftInVal = 11 - bitOffset;
Now we have 3 possible scenarios:
1) if we have more than 8 bits left in the current value, we can stamp down our input (as a bitwise "or") but do not increment the write position (as we have more to write for this value), and note that we're 8-bits further along:
if(bitsLeftInVal > 8)
{
arr[index] |= val;
bitOffset += 8;
}
2) if we have exactly 8 bits left in the current value, we can stamp down our input (as a bitwise "or") and increment the write position; the next loop can start at zero:
else if(bitsLeftInVal == 8)
{
arr[index++] |= val;
bitOffset = 0;
}
3) otherwise, we have less than 8 bits left in the current value; so we need to write the first bitsLeftInVal bits to the current output position (incrementing the output position), and whatever is left to the next output position. Since we already left-shifted by bitOffset, what this really means is simply: stamp down (as a bitwise "or") the low 11 bits (val & 2047) to the current position, and whatever is left (val >> 11) to the next if that wouldn't exceed our output buffer (padding zeros). Then calculate our new bitOffset:
else
{
arr[index++] |= (val & 2047);
if(index != arr.Length) arr[index] = val >> 11;
bitOffset = 8 - bitsLeftInVal;
}
And that's basically it. Lots of bitwise operations - shifts (<< / >>), masks (&) and combinations (|).
If you wanted to store the least significant 11 bits of an int into two bytes such that the least significant byte has bits 1-8 inclusive and the most significant byte has 9-11:
int toStore = 123456789;
byte msb = (byte) ((toStore >> 8) & 7); //or 0b111
byte lsb = (byte) (toStore & 255); //or 0b11111111
To check this, 123456789 in binary is:
0b111010110111100110100010101
MMMLLLLLLLL
The bits above L are lsb, and have a value of 21, above M are msb and have a value of 5
Doing the work is the shift operator >> where all the binary digits are slid to the right 8 places (8 of them disappear from the right hand side - they're gone, into oblivion):
0b111010110111100110100010101 >> 8 =
0b1110101101111001101
And the mask operator & (the mask operator works by only keeping bits where, in each position, they're 1 in the value and also 1 in the mask) :
0b111010110111100110100010101 &
0b000000000000000000011111111 (255) =
0b000000000000000000000010101
If you're processing an int array, just do this in a loop:
byte[] bs = new byte[ intarray.Length*2 ];
for(int x = 0, b=0; x < intarray.Length; x++){
int toStore = intarray[x];
bs[b++] = (byte) ((toStore >> 8) & 7);
bs[b++] = (byte) (toStore & 255);
}
I want to convert an int to a byte[2] array using BCD.
The int in question will come from DateTime representing the Year and must be converted to two bytes.
Is there any pre-made function that does this or can you give me a simple way of doing this?
example:
int year = 2010
would output:
byte[2]{0x20, 0x10};
static byte[] Year2Bcd(int year) {
if (year < 0 || year > 9999) throw new ArgumentException();
int bcd = 0;
for (int digit = 0; digit < 4; ++digit) {
int nibble = year % 10;
bcd |= nibble << (digit * 4);
year /= 10;
}
return new byte[] { (byte)((bcd >> 8) & 0xff), (byte)(bcd & 0xff) };
}
Beware that you asked for a big-endian result, that's a bit unusual.
Use this method.
public static byte[] ToBcd(int value){
if(value<0 || value>99999999)
throw new ArgumentOutOfRangeException("value");
byte[] ret=new byte[4];
for(int i=0;i<4;i++){
ret[i]=(byte)(value%10);
value/=10;
ret[i]|=(byte)((value%10)<<4);
value/=10;
}
return ret;
}
This is essentially how it works.
If the value is less than 0 or greater than 99999999, the value won't fit in four bytes. More formally, if the value is less than 0 or is 10^(n*2) or greater, where n is the number of bytes, the value won't fit in n bytes.
For each byte:
Set that byte to the remainder of the value-divided-by-10 to the byte. (This will place the last digit in the low nibble [half-byte] of the current byte.)
Divide the value by 10.
Add 16 times the remainder of the value-divided-by-10 to the byte. (This will place the now-last digit in the high nibble of the current byte.)
Divide the value by 10.
(One optimization is to set every byte to 0 beforehand -- which is implicitly done by .NET when it allocates a new array -- and to stop iterating when the value reaches 0. This latter optimization is not done in the code above, for simplicity. Also, if available, some compilers or assemblers offer a divide/remainder routine that allows retrieving the quotient and remainder in one division step, an optimization which is not usually necessary though.)
Here's a terrible brute-force version. I'm sure there's a better way than this, but it ought to work anyway.
int digitOne = year / 1000;
int digitTwo = (year - digitOne * 1000) / 100;
int digitThree = (year - digitOne * 1000 - digitTwo * 100) / 10;
int digitFour = year - digitOne * 1000 - digitTwo * 100 - digitThree * 10;
byte[] bcdYear = new byte[] { digitOne << 4 | digitTwo, digitThree << 4 | digitFour };
The sad part about it is that fast binary to BCD conversions are built into the x86 microprocessor architecture, if you could get at them!
Here is a slightly cleaner version then Jeffrey's
static byte[] IntToBCD(int input)
{
if (input > 9999 || input < 0)
throw new ArgumentOutOfRangeException("input");
int thousands = input / 1000;
int hundreds = (input -= thousands * 1000) / 100;
int tens = (input -= hundreds * 100) / 10;
int ones = (input -= tens * 10);
byte[] bcd = new byte[] {
(byte)(thousands << 4 | hundreds),
(byte)(tens << 4 | ones)
};
return bcd;
}
maybe a simple parse function containing this loop
i=0;
while (id>0)
{
twodigits=id%100; //need 2 digits per byte
arr[i]=twodigits%10 + twodigits/10*16; //first digit on first 4 bits second digit shifted with 4 bits
id/=100;
i++;
}
More common solution
private IEnumerable<Byte> GetBytes(Decimal value)
{
Byte currentByte = 0;
Boolean odd = true;
while (value > 0)
{
if (odd)
currentByte = 0;
Decimal rest = value % 10;
value = (value-rest)/10;
currentByte |= (Byte)(odd ? (Byte)rest : (Byte)((Byte)rest << 4));
if(!odd)
yield return currentByte;
odd = !odd;
}
if(!odd)
yield return currentByte;
}
Same version as Peter O. but in VB.NET
Public Shared Function ToBcd(ByVal pValue As Integer) As Byte()
If pValue < 0 OrElse pValue > 99999999 Then Throw New ArgumentOutOfRangeException("value")
Dim ret As Byte() = New Byte(3) {} 'All bytes are init with 0's
For i As Integer = 0 To 3
ret(i) = CByte(pValue Mod 10)
pValue = Math.Floor(pValue / 10.0)
ret(i) = ret(i) Or CByte((pValue Mod 10) << 4)
pValue = Math.Floor(pValue / 10.0)
If pValue = 0 Then Exit For
Next
Return ret
End Function
The trick here is to be aware that simply using pValue /= 10 will round the value so if for instance the argument is "16", the first part of the byte will be correct, but the result of the division will be 2 (as 1.6 will be rounded up). Therefore I use the Math.Floor method.
I made a generic routine posted at IntToByteArray that you could use like:
var yearInBytes = ConvertBigIntToBcd(2010, 2);
static byte[] IntToBCD(int input) {
byte[] bcd = new byte[] {
(byte)(input>> 8),
(byte)(input& 0x00FF)
};
return bcd;
}
In order to utilize a byte to its fullest potential, I'm attempting to store two unique values into a byte: one in the first four bits and another in the second four bits. However, I've found that, while this practice allows for optimized memory allocation, it makes changing the individual values stored in the byte difficult.
In my code, I want to change the first set of four bits in a byte while maintaining the value of the second four bits in the same byte. While bitwise operations allow me to easily retrieve and manipulate the first four bit values, I'm finding it difficult to concatenate this new value with the second set of four bits in a byte. The question is, how can I erase the first four bits from a byte (or, more accurately, set them all the zero) and add the new set of 4 bits to replace the four bits that were just erased, thus preserving the last 4 bits in a byte while changing the first four?
Here's an example:
// Changes the first four bits in a byte to the parameter value
public void changeFirstFourBits(byte newFirstFour)
{
// If 'newFirstFour' is 0101 in binary, make 'value' 01011111 in binary, changing
// the first four bits but leaving the second four alone.
}
private byte value = 255; // binary: 11111111
Use bitwise AND (&) to clear out the old bits, shift the new bits to the correct position and bitwise OR (|) them together:
value = (value & 0xF) | (newFirstFour << 4);
Here's what happens:
value : abcdefgh
newFirstFour : 0000xyzw
0xF : 00001111
value & 0xF : 0000efgh
newFirstFour << 4 : xyzw0000
(value & 0xF) | (newFirstFour << 4) : xyzwefgh
When I have to do bit-twiddling like this, I make a readonly struct to do it for me. A four-bit integer is called nybble, of course:
struct TwoNybbles
{
private readonly byte b;
public byte High { get { return (byte)(b >> 4); } }
public byte Low { get { return (byte)(b & 0x0F); } {
public TwoNybbles(byte high, byte low)
{
this.b = (byte)((high << 4) | (low & 0x0F));
}
And then add implicit conversions between TwoNybbles and byte. Now you can just treat any byte as having a High and Low byte without putting all that ugly bit twiddling in your mainline code.
You first mask out you the high four bytes using value & 0xF. Then you shift the new bits to the high four bits using newFirstFour << 4 and finally you combine them together using binary or.
public void changeHighFourBits(byte newHighFour)
{
value=(byte)( (value & 0x0F) | (newFirstFour << 4));
}
public void changeLowFourBits(byte newLowFour)
{
value=(byte)( (value & 0xF0) | newLowFour);
}
I'm not really sure what your method there is supposed to do, but here are some methods for you:
void setHigh(ref byte b, byte val) {
b = (b & 0xf) | (val << 4);
}
byte high(byte b) {
return (b & 0xf0) >> 4;
}
void setLow(ref byte b, byte val) {
b = (b & 0xf0) | val;
}
byte low(byte b) {
return b & 0xf;
}
Should be self-explanatory.
public int SplatBit(int Reg, int Val, int ValLen, int Pos)
{
int mask = ((1 << ValLen) - 1) << Pos;
int newv = Val << Pos;
int res = (Reg & ~mask) | newv;
return res;
}
Example:
Reg = 135
Val = 9 (ValLen = 4, because 9 = 1001)
Pos = 2
135 = 10000111
9 = 1001
9 << Pos = 100100
Result = 10100111
A quick look would indicate that a bitwise and can be achieved using the & operator. So to remove the first four bytes you should be able to do:
byte value1=255; //11111111
byte value2=15; //00001111
return value1&value2;
Assuming newVal contains the value you want to store in origVal.
Do this for the 4 least significant bits:
byte origVal = ???;
byte newVal = ???
orig = (origVal & 0xF0) + newVal;
and this for the 4 most significant bits:
byte origVal = ???;
byte newVal = ???
orig = (origVal & 0xF) + (newVal << 4);
I know you asked specifically about clearing out the first four bits, which has been answered several times, but I wanted to point out that if you have two values <= decimal 15, you can combine them into 8 bits simply with this:
public int setBits(int upperFour, int lowerFour)
{
return upperFour << 4 | lowerFour;
}
The result will be xxxxyyyy where
xxxx = upperFour
yyyy = lowerFour
And that is what you seem to be trying to do.
Here's some code, but I think the earlier answers will do it for you. This is just to show some sort of test code to copy and past into a simple console project (the WriteBits method by be of help):
static void Main(string[] args)
{
int b1 = 255;
WriteBits(b1);
int b2 = b1 >> 4;
WriteBits(b2);
int b3 = b1 & ~0xF ;
WriteBits(b3);
// Store 5 in first nibble
int b4 = 5 << 4;
WriteBits(b4);
// Store 8 in second nibble
int b5 = 8;
WriteBits(b5);
// Store 5 and 8 in first and second nibbles
int b6 = 0;
b6 |= (5 << 4) + 8;
WriteBits(b6);
// Store 2 and 4
int b7 = 0;
b7 = StoreFirstNibble(2, b7);
b7 = StoreSecondNibble(4, b7);
WriteBits(b7);
// Read First Nibble
int first = ReadFirstNibble(b7);
WriteBits(first);
// Read Second Nibble
int second = ReadSecondNibble(b7);
WriteBits(second);
}
static int ReadFirstNibble(int storage)
{
return storage >> 4;
}
static int ReadSecondNibble(int storage)
{
return storage &= 0xF;
}
static int StoreFirstNibble(int val, int storage)
{
return storage |= (val << 4);
}
static int StoreSecondNibble(int val, int storage)
{
return storage |= val;
}
static void WriteBits(int b)
{
Console.WriteLine(BitConverter.ToString(BitConverter.GetBytes(b),0));
}
}
I have a problem where I need to be able to generate identical uniformly distributed numeric hashs for a GUID in both javascript and C#. I guess that would prevent me from using Guid.GetHashCode() in C#, since I can't reproduce the behavior in JS without reverse engineering the C#.
Is there a fast way to produce hashes from guids/strings in JS? Are all digits of the string uniformly distributed in a .NET generated GUID? Should I just cast/convert the trailing chars into an int?
The bytes are apparently not evenly distributed.
I put together some code to sample the .NET Guids and plot the distribution:
First of all the test code, this creates one million Guids and counts the number of different values for each byte in the byte array. It outputs it all into a matrix that I plot in Scilab.
int[,] counter = new int[16, 256];
for (int i = 0; i < 1000000; i++)
{
var g = Guid.NewGuid();
var bytes = g.ToByteArray();
for (int idx = 0; idx < 16; idx++)
{
counter[idx, bytes[idx]]++;
}
}
StringBuilder sb = new StringBuilder();
sb.AppendLine("x = [");
for (int idx = 0; idx < 16; idx++)
{
for (int b = 0; b < 256; b++)
{
sb.Append(counter[idx, b]);
if (idx != 255)
{
sb.Append(" ");
}
}
if (idx != 15)
{
sb.AppendLine(";");
}
}
sb.AppendLine("]");
File.WriteAllText("plot.sce", sb.ToString());
Here are the distributions, the graphs plot the number of each distinct value for each of the positions in the byte array:
The value distribution for the positions 0-6 in the byte array:
The value distribution for the position 7 in the byte array:
The value distribution for the position 8 in the byte array:
The value distribution for the positions 9-15 in the byte array:
For byte positions 0-6 and 9-15 the distribution of values seems to be even, but for byte position 7 and 8 the distribution is fairly limited.
That is, for the guid (with the beginning of the byte positions below, note strange ordering)
{1369ea05-b9f9-408b-ac7c-7ebd0f35d562}
1 1 1 1 1 1
3 2 1 0 5 4 7 6 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5
The position 7 can take the values from 64 (0x40) to 79 (0x4F).
The position 8 can take the values from 128 (0x80) to 191 (0xBF).
The rest of the bytes are evenly distributed.
Note: The tests was run on .NET4 on a 32 bit Windows 7 machine.
Lesson: don't assume stuff, test.
Answer: To use the .NET Guids for calculating your load balancing, you can use any part except the positions marked 7 and 8 in the Guid above.
Question: Does anybody know WHY the distribution is not evenly spread?
you can create a web service to generate the hash value on the server side, use whatever language you want. on client side, a simple web service call will do the trick.
Reflector says the .NET Guid.GetHashCode() is implemented like this
public override int GetHashCode()
{
return ((this._a ^ ((this._b << 0x10) | ((ushort) this._c))) ^ ((this._f << 0x18) | this._k));
}
_a, _b, _c and _f is defined in the constructor taking a byte[16] array
public Guid(byte[] b)
{
if (b == null)
{
throw new ArgumentNullException("b");
}
if (b.Length != 0x10)
{
throw new ArgumentException(Environment.GetResourceString("Arg_GuidArrayCtor", new object[] { "16" }));
}
this._a = (((b[3] << 0x18) | (b[2] << 0x10)) | (b[1] << 8)) | b[0];
this._b = (short) ((b[5] << 8) | b[4]);
this._c = (short) ((b[7] << 8) | b[6]);
this._d = b[8];
this._e = b[9];
this._f = b[10];
this._g = b[11];
this._h = b[12];
this._i = b[13];
this._j = b[14];
this._k = b[15];
}