Sign Up

Sign Up to our social questions and Answers Engine to ask questions, answer people’s questions, and connect with other people.

Have an account? Sign In

Have an account? Sign In Now

Sign In

Login to our social questions & Answers Engine to ask questions answer people’s questions & connect with other people.

Sign Up Here

Forgot Password?

Don't have account, Sign Up Here

Forgot Password

Lost your password? Please enter your email address. You will receive a link and will create a new password via email.

Have an account? Sign In Now

You must login to ask a question.

Forgot Password?

Need An Account, Sign Up Here

Please briefly explain why you feel this question should be reported.

Please briefly explain why you feel this answer should be reported.

Please briefly explain why you feel this user should be reported.

Sign InSign Up

The Archive Base

The Archive Base Logo The Archive Base Logo

The Archive Base Navigation

  • SEARCH
  • Home
  • About Us
  • Blog
  • Contact Us
Search
Ask A Question

Mobile menu

Close
Ask a Question
  • Home
  • Add group
  • Groups page
  • Feed
  • User Profile
  • Communities
  • Questions
    • New Questions
    • Trending Questions
    • Must read Questions
    • Hot Questions
  • Polls
  • Tags
  • Badges
  • Buy Points
  • Users
  • Help
  • Buy Theme
  • SEARCH
Home/ Questions/Q 3401730
In Process

The Archive Base Latest Questions

Editorial Team
  • 0
Editorial Team
Asked: May 18, 20262026-05-18T05:03:04+00:00 2026-05-18T05:03:04+00:00

My solution (for every bit of the input block, there is such a line):

  • 0

My solution (for every bit of the input block, there is such a line):

*parity ^= (((x[0] >> 30) & 0x00000001) * 0xc3e0d69f);

All types are uint32. This line takes the second bit of the input x, shifts it to the LSB and sets all other bits to zero. Then, the 32-bit parity is XORed with the corresponding parity set for this bit.

I found that this multiplication solution is the fastest way to do this conditional XOR. Is there a faster way?

  • 1 1 Answer
  • 0 Views
  • 0 Followers
  • 0
Share
  • Facebook
  • Report

Leave an answer
Cancel reply

You must login to add an answer.

Forgot Password?

Need An Account, Sign Up Here

1 Answer

  • Voted
  • Oldest
  • Recent
  • Random
  1. Editorial Team
    Editorial Team
    2026-05-18T05:03:05+00:00Added an answer on May 18, 2026 at 5:03 am

    I do not completely understand what kind of parity you mean, but if this line of code is doing that you want, it may be improved.

    General rule: for x in {0, 1} x * N == –x & N

    this because -x for 0 is all bits reset and for 1 is -1 in which all bits set.

    So original line of code may be rewritten as:

    *parity ^= (-((x[0] >> 30) & 0x00000001) & 0xc3e0d69f);
    

    What two operations computed in less time than multiplication on many microprocessors, but you should check this.

    Also code may take advantage of signed shift right

    *parity ^= (((int32_t)x[0] << 1 >> 31) & 0xc3e0d69f);
    

    First shift rshifts 30th bit into 31st, which is sign bit, and then second extend sign bit on all others as shift right on most machines act as floor(x / 2N), thus fill shifted in bits with sign bit (abc...yz>>3 == aaaabc...yz).

    But these tricks are stated as undefined behaviour in C standard and thus not portable. Use them carefully.

    • 0
    • Reply
    • Share
      Share
      • Share on Facebook
      • Share on Twitter
      • Share on LinkedIn
      • Share on WhatsApp
      • Report

Sidebar

Related Questions

Possible Duplicates: Is there a problem that has only a recursive solution? Can every
Every solution I come up with is not thread save. def uuid(cls,db): u =
I've read about postion:absolute problems and tried almost every possible solution. Including positioning divs
every time I open my Solution in Visual Studio it tries to communicate and
We have a large solution (> 100 projects) and almost every type uses either
I have a Visual Studio 2005 solution. Every time I try to run the
i know every web-developer hates this topic, but anyway... i found no good solution
Everyone, every blog is talking about HTML 5 and giving solution to use HTML
solution:[a-zA-Z0-9.!#$%&'*+-/=?\^_`{|}~-]+@[a-zA-Z0-9-]+(?:\.[a-zA-Z0-9-]+)* is a good choice I am using a regular expression like the below
It may seem a bit odd to ask this since there are several solutions

Explore

  • Home
  • Add group
  • Groups page
  • Communities
  • Questions
    • New Questions
    • Trending Questions
    • Must read Questions
    • Hot Questions
  • Polls
  • Tags
  • Badges
  • Users
  • Help
  • SEARCH

Footer

© 2021 The Archive Base. All Rights Reserved
With Love by The Archive Base

Insert/edit link

Enter the destination URL

Or link to existing content

    No search term specified. Showing recent items. Search or use up and down arrow keys to select an item.