• Log InLog In
  • Register
Liquid`
Team Liquid Liquipedia
EDT 18:45
CEST 00:45
KST 07:45
  • Home
  • Forum
  • Calendar
  • Streams
  • Liquipedia
  • Features
  • Store
  • EPT
  • TL+
  • StarCraft 2
  • Brood War
  • Smash
  • Heroes
  • Counter-Strike
  • Overwatch
  • Liquibet
  • Fantasy StarCraft
  • TLPD
  • StarCraft 2
  • Brood War
  • Blogs
Forum Sidebar
Events/Features
News
Featured News
TL.net Map Contest #21: Voting10[ASL20] Ro4 Preview: Descent11Team TLMC #5: Winners Announced!3[ASL20] Ro8 Preview Pt2: Holding On9Maestros of the Game: Live Finals Preview (RO4)5
Community News
Weekly Cups (Oct 13-19): Clem Goes for Four0BSL Team A vs Koreans - Sat-Sun 16:00 CET6Weekly Cups (Oct 6-12): Four star herO85.0.15 Patch Balance Hotfix (2025-10-8)80Weekly Cups (Sept 29-Oct 5): MaxPax triples up3
StarCraft 2
General
The New Patch Killed Mech! Team Liquid Map Contest #21 - Presented by Monster Energy herO joins T1 Weekly Cups (Oct 13-19): Clem Goes for Four TL.net Map Contest #21: Voting
Tourneys
SC2's Safe House 2 - October 18 & 19 INu's Battles #13 - ByuN vs Zoun Tenacious Turtle Tussle Sparkling Tuna Cup - Weekly Open Tournament $1,200 WardiTV October (Oct 21st-31st)
Strategy
Custom Maps
Map Editor closed ?
External Content
Mutation # 496 Endless Infection Mutation # 495 Rest In Peace Mutation # 494 Unstable Environment Mutation # 493 Quick Killers
Brood War
General
BW caster Sayle BSL Season 21 BW General Discussion BGH Auto Balance -> http://bghmmr.eu/ BSL Team A vs Koreans - Sat-Sun 16:00 CET
Tourneys
Azhi's Colosseum - Anonymous Tournament [ASL20] Semifinal B [Megathread] Daily Proleagues SC4ALL $1,500 Open Bracket LAN
Strategy
[I] TvP Strategies and Build Roaring Currents ASL final [I] TvZ Strategies and Builds Current Meta
Other Games
General Games
Stormgate/Frost Giant Megathread Nintendo Switch Thread Path of Exile Dawn of War IV ZeroSpace Megathread
Dota 2
Official 'what is Dota anymore' discussion LiquidDota to reintegrate into TL.net
League of Legends
Heroes of the Storm
Simple Questions, Simple Answers Heroes of the Storm 2.0
Hearthstone
Deck construction bug Heroes of StarCraft mini-set
TL Mafia
TL Mafia Community Thread SPIRED by.ASL Mafia {211640}
Community
General
US Politics Mega-thread Things Aren’t Peaceful in Palestine Russo-Ukrainian War Thread Men's Fashion Thread Sex and weight loss
Fan Clubs
The herO Fan Club!
Media & Entertainment
Series you have seen recently... Anime Discussion Thread [Manga] One Piece Movie Discussion!
Sports
2024 - 2026 Football Thread Formula 1 Discussion MLB/Baseball 2023 NBA General Discussion TeamLiquid Health and Fitness Initiative For 2023
World Cup 2022
Tech Support
SC2 Client Relocalization [Change SC2 Language] Linksys AE2500 USB WIFI keeps disconnecting Computer Build, Upgrade & Buying Resource Thread
TL Community
The Automated Ban List Recent Gifted Posts
Blogs
The Heroism of Pepe the Fro…
Peanutsc
Rocket League: Traits, Abili…
TrAiDoS
Customize Sidebar...

Website Feedback

Closed Threads



Active: 1339 users

The Big Programming Thread - Page 217

Forum Index > General Forum
Post a Reply
Prev 1 215 216 217 218 219 1032 Next
Thread Rules
1. This is not a "do my homework for me" thread. If you have specific questions, ask, but don't post an assignment or homework problem and expect an exact solution.
2. No recruiting for your cockamamie projects (you won't replace facebook with 3 dudes you found on the internet and $20)
3. If you can't articulate why a language is bad, don't start slinging shit about it. Just remember that nothing is worse than making CSS IE6 compatible.
4. Use [code] tags to format code blocks.
meadbert
Profile Blog Joined October 2010
United States681 Posts
Last Edited: 2012-12-13 17:53:43
December 13 2012 17:43 GMT
#4321
On December 13 2012 23:16 heishe wrote:
Question: Given an ordinary 16-bit number, what's the fastest way to count the number of all consecutive 1s from the left? I've looked at the graphics.stanford site, but I can't apply anything.

E.g. 1110101011000101 should return 3; 1111100100100111... should return 5, etc.

Checking single bits is trivial, but it's also incredibly slow.

So far the only thing I've tried are lookup tables, which are even slower than looping through all bits manually (probably because a lookup table doesn't fit into the cache at all, resulting in tons of cache misses)

Lookup tables should be really fast.
Storing your answers can be done in 64KB which should fit in the cache:

Because you cannot have more than 16 bits in a row you could even store two values per answer, but involves more math.

If you are having cache missets you can just try doing that and it only takes 32KB.

Finally, you can do the lookup 8 bits at a time instead, but this gets tricky when you have sequences that cross the midpoint.

Basically you can have 3 lookups for long run of 1s. 1s at beginning and 1s at end.

Finally your answer will be the maxium of longest(highest 8 bits), longest(lowest 8 bits), end(highest 8 bits) + beginning (lowest 8 bits)
Blisse
Profile Blog Joined July 2010
Canada3710 Posts
Last Edited: 2012-12-13 17:53:31
December 13 2012 17:51 GMT
#4322
-edit-
There is no one like you in the universe.
heishe
Profile Blog Joined June 2009
Germany2284 Posts
December 13 2012 18:05 GMT
#4323
On December 14 2012 02:43 meadbert wrote:
Show nested quote +
On December 13 2012 23:16 heishe wrote:
Question: Given an ordinary 16-bit number, what's the fastest way to count the number of all consecutive 1s from the left? I've looked at the graphics.stanford site, but I can't apply anything.

E.g. 1110101011000101 should return 3; 1111100100100111... should return 5, etc.

Checking single bits is trivial, but it's also incredibly slow.

So far the only thing I've tried are lookup tables, which are even slower than looping through all bits manually (probably because a lookup table doesn't fit into the cache at all, resulting in tons of cache misses)

Lookup tables should be really fast.
Storing your answers can be done in 64KB which should fit in the cache:

Because you cannot have more than 16 bits in a row you could even store two values per answer, but involves more math.

If you are having cache missets you can just try doing that and it only takes 32KB.

Finally, you can do the lookup 8 bits at a time instead, but this gets tricky when you have sequences that cross the midpoint.

Basically you can have 3 lookups for long run of 1s. 1s at beginning and 1s at end.

Finally your answer will be the maxium of longest(highest 8 bits), longest(lowest 8 bits), end(highest 8 bits) + beginning (lowest 8 bits)


I already implemented and tested a version with a 64k lookup table for the entire 16 bit, as well as a version with two 256 lookup tables. With both versions, L1 cache misses take away so much time that it negates any speed advantage that I might have gained from the lookup tables, which results in the lookup-table versions actually being slower. Remember: A single cache miss into L2 cache already costs you about 20-30 cycles. In those 30 cycles, I can almost read the value bitwise manually. And that's just for L1 cache misses. Since counting these leading zeroes / ones isn't the only thing I do, there are a lot of other things that need to be in cache as well.

The problem is that L1 caches still are very small. The processor I'm using at work (some i7 Hexacore) has L1 cache sizes of 32k for each core. That's 32kbyte. The lookup table requires 64k * 8 bit (since the smallest I can store are 1 byte values in the array), which means that only a very small part of the lookup table fits into l1 cache at any given time. The 256 * 8 bit one actually fits into it entirely, but it still generates a lot of L1 cache misses, because of the other things that fight for cache space as well.


If you value your soul, never look into the eye of a horse. Your soul will forever be lost in the void of the horse.
JustPassingBy
Profile Blog Joined January 2011
10776 Posts
December 13 2012 18:15 GMT
#4324
Agh! I hope nobody minds me letting off some steam here. Who knows, maybe I am even not seeing something which might resolve my problem and somebody can help. But I am currently really a bit frustrated about the STL container std::set.

The main reason? Because of std::insert(...)! (see here)
You can either...
a) specify an iterator position, from which std::insert starts its search for the element to be inserted, which speeds up the search alot, if you know some handy information of your std::set, which I do. Or...
b) get a bool returned which tells you whether the element was really inserted or already there in the first place, which I desperately need, since I want to program a function for computing the symmetric difference.

But you cannot do both, which I cannot understand why!

And no, I sadly cannot use the std::set_symmetric_difference provided, because it creates a completely new list, which is problematic because my list is guaranteed to be several megabyte in size and the symmetric difference is something which I want to use over one hundred thousand times.

Agh, time to go home, Ritmix already started anyways... -.-
meadbert
Profile Blog Joined October 2010
United States681 Posts
December 13 2012 18:33 GMT
#4325
On December 14 2012 03:05 heishe wrote:
Show nested quote +
On December 14 2012 02:43 meadbert wrote:
On December 13 2012 23:16 heishe wrote:
Question: Given an ordinary 16-bit number, what's the fastest way to count the number of all consecutive 1s from the left? I've looked at the graphics.stanford site, but I can't apply anything.

E.g. 1110101011000101 should return 3; 1111100100100111... should return 5, etc.

Checking single bits is trivial, but it's also incredibly slow.

So far the only thing I've tried are lookup tables, which are even slower than looping through all bits manually (probably because a lookup table doesn't fit into the cache at all, resulting in tons of cache misses)

Lookup tables should be really fast.
Storing your answers can be done in 64KB which should fit in the cache:

Because you cannot have more than 16 bits in a row you could even store two values per answer, but involves more math.

If you are having cache missets you can just try doing that and it only takes 32KB.

Finally, you can do the lookup 8 bits at a time instead, but this gets tricky when you have sequences that cross the midpoint.

Basically you can have 3 lookups for long run of 1s. 1s at beginning and 1s at end.

Finally your answer will be the maxium of longest(highest 8 bits), longest(lowest 8 bits), end(highest 8 bits) + beginning (lowest 8 bits)


I already implemented and tested a version with a 64k lookup table for the entire 16 bit, as well as a version with two 256 lookup tables. With both versions, L1 cache misses take away so much time that it negates any speed advantage that I might have gained from the lookup tables, which results in the lookup-table versions actually being slower. Remember: A single cache miss into L2 cache already costs you about 20-30 cycles. In those 30 cycles, I can almost read the value bitwise manually. And that's just for L1 cache misses. Since counting these leading zeroes / ones isn't the only thing I do, there are a lot of other things that need to be in cache as well.

The problem is that L1 caches still are very small. The processor I'm using at work (some i7 Hexacore) has L1 cache sizes of 32k for each core. That's 32kbyte. The lookup table requires 64k * 8 bit (since the smallest I can store are 1 byte values in the array), which means that only a very small part of the lookup table fits into l1 cache at any given time. The 256 * 8 bit one actually fits into it entirely, but it still generates a lot of L1 cache misses, because of the other things that fight for cache space as well.



Using a straight lookup table I was able to do 16 billion lookups in 7 seconds. Is that not fast enough?
The bitwise slow way took 65 seconds.
Storing 2 results per byte took 17 seconds so fewer cache misses did not offset the extra computation.
Finally doing 8 bits at a time took 20 seconds.
heishe
Profile Blog Joined June 2009
Germany2284 Posts
Last Edited: 2012-12-13 18:46:57
December 13 2012 18:45 GMT
#4326
On December 14 2012 03:33 meadbert wrote:
Show nested quote +
On December 14 2012 03:05 heishe wrote:
On December 14 2012 02:43 meadbert wrote:
On December 13 2012 23:16 heishe wrote:
Question: Given an ordinary 16-bit number, what's the fastest way to count the number of all consecutive 1s from the left? I've looked at the graphics.stanford site, but I can't apply anything.

E.g. 1110101011000101 should return 3; 1111100100100111... should return 5, etc.

Checking single bits is trivial, but it's also incredibly slow.

So far the only thing I've tried are lookup tables, which are even slower than looping through all bits manually (probably because a lookup table doesn't fit into the cache at all, resulting in tons of cache misses)

Lookup tables should be really fast.
Storing your answers can be done in 64KB which should fit in the cache:

Because you cannot have more than 16 bits in a row you could even store two values per answer, but involves more math.

If you are having cache missets you can just try doing that and it only takes 32KB.

Finally, you can do the lookup 8 bits at a time instead, but this gets tricky when you have sequences that cross the midpoint.

Basically you can have 3 lookups for long run of 1s. 1s at beginning and 1s at end.

Finally your answer will be the maxium of longest(highest 8 bits), longest(lowest 8 bits), end(highest 8 bits) + beginning (lowest 8 bits)


I already implemented and tested a version with a 64k lookup table for the entire 16 bit, as well as a version with two 256 lookup tables. With both versions, L1 cache misses take away so much time that it negates any speed advantage that I might have gained from the lookup tables, which results in the lookup-table versions actually being slower. Remember: A single cache miss into L2 cache already costs you about 20-30 cycles. In those 30 cycles, I can almost read the value bitwise manually. And that's just for L1 cache misses. Since counting these leading zeroes / ones isn't the only thing I do, there are a lot of other things that need to be in cache as well.

The problem is that L1 caches still are very small. The processor I'm using at work (some i7 Hexacore) has L1 cache sizes of 32k for each core. That's 32kbyte. The lookup table requires 64k * 8 bit (since the smallest I can store are 1 byte values in the array), which means that only a very small part of the lookup table fits into l1 cache at any given time. The 256 * 8 bit one actually fits into it entirely, but it still generates a lot of L1 cache misses, because of the other things that fight for cache space as well.



Using a straight lookup table I was able to do 16 billion lookups in 7 seconds. Is that not fast enough?
The bitwise slow way took 65 seconds.
Storing 2 results per byte took 17 seconds so fewer cache misses did not offset the extra computation.
Finally doing 8 bits at a time took 20 seconds.


In a closed test? That isn't representative at all. Like I said, there's a lot of other stuff going on as well. Besides, I already wrote that I tested it and it was too slow Why is your data relevant.
If you value your soul, never look into the eye of a horse. Your soul will forever be lost in the void of the horse.
meadbert
Profile Blog Joined October 2010
United States681 Posts
Last Edited: 2012-12-13 19:07:35
December 13 2012 19:04 GMT
#4327
Here is another fairly fast more cache friendly method.
Have three lookup tables.
The first is an 8 bit look table for longest streak of ones.
Next is an optional 8 bit lookup table for current streak (on average this is fast so table not needed)
Finally you have a 256x9x9 matrix where you store the max streak given 3 variables which are:
lower 8 bits
longest streak from higher 8 bits
current streak from higher 8 bits.

This uses about 20K instead of 64 so it fits within your 32K cache.
Using a closed test I found it took 9 seconds as opposed to 7 for a straight lookup.
Considering cache hits this might be faster for you.
+ Show Spoiler +

#include <stdlib.h>
#include <stdio.h>

unsigned char maxBitsSlow(
unsigned int n)
{
unsigned char count = 0;
unsigned char max = 0;

while(n > 0) {
if(n&1) {
count++;
if(count > max) {
max = count;
}
}
n >>= 1;
}
return max;
}

unsigned char lowBitsSlow(
unsigned char n)
{
unsigned char count = 0;
unsigned char max = 0;

while((n&1) > 0) {
count++;
n >>= 1;
}
return count;
}

unsigned char rowContSlow(
unsigned char n,
unsigned char count,
unsigned char max)
{
while(n > 0) {
if(n&1) {
count++;
if(count > max) {
max = count;
}
}
n >>= 1;
}
return max;
}

unsigned char rowArray[1 << 8];
unsigned char lowArray[1 << 8];
unsigned char rowMatrix[1 << 8][9][9];

void init(void)
{
unsigned int i, j, k;

for(i = 0;i < (1 << 8);i++) {
rowArray[i] = maxBitsSlow(i);
lowArray[i] = lowBitsSlow(i);
}
for(i = 0;i < (1 << 8);i++) {
for(j = 0;j <= 8;j++) {
for(k = 0;k <= 8;k++) {
rowMatrix[i][j][k] = rowContSlow(i, j, k);
}
}
}
}

unsigned char maxBitsCont(
unsigned short n)
{
unsigned char high = n >> 8;
unsigned char low = n&63;
unsigned char max = rowArray[high];
unsigned char count = lowArray[high];

return rowMatrix[low][count][max];
}


EDIT: How can I preserve my spacing?
Denar
Profile Blog Joined March 2011
France1633 Posts
Last Edited: 2012-12-13 19:18:46
December 13 2012 19:17 GMT
#4328
On December 13 2012 23:16 heishe wrote:
Question: Given an ordinary 16-bit number, what's the fastest way to count the number of all consecutive 1s from the left? I've looked at the graphics.stanford site, but I can't apply anything.

E.g. 1110101011000101 should return 3; 1111100100100111... should return 5, etc.

Checking single bits is trivial, but it's also incredibly slow.

So far the only thing I've tried are lookup tables, which are even slower than looping through all bits manually (probably because a lookup table doesn't fit into the cache at all, resulting in tons of cache misses)


In ASM, do :
(assuming your number is in the lower 16 bits of eax)


not ax, ax
bsr ax, ax


I am going to break it down quick if you are not familiar with x86 Assembly :

not will replace all 1s with 0s, and all 0s with 1s
bsr (Bit Scan Reverse) will return the index of the first bit at 1, which is the value you were looking for.

This will be extremely fast, about 4 cycles (depending on your processor.)
heishe
Profile Blog Joined June 2009
Germany2284 Posts
Last Edited: 2012-12-13 19:26:17
December 13 2012 19:24 GMT
#4329
bsr doesn't work, it scans from the right (don't suggest bsf, it is the same thing, it just starts the search from the other side ).
In the example binaries I gave, your method would return 1 for the first number, and three for the second I need "3" and "5" though.

It effectively counts trailing zeroes, but I need something that counts leading zeroes. I could reverse the bit-order of the relevant word (16 bit) but afaik there's no x86 instruction for that, and anything manual for that would take way too many cycles. At least I don't know an algorithm that does it in sub ~5 cycles.
If you value your soul, never look into the eye of a horse. Your soul will forever be lost in the void of the horse.
Denar
Profile Blog Joined March 2011
France1633 Posts
December 13 2012 19:29 GMT
#4330
On December 14 2012 04:24 heishe wrote:
bsr doesn't work, it scans from the right (don't suggest bsf, it is the same thing, it just starts the search from the other side ).
In the example binaries I gave, your method would return 1 for the first number, and three for the second I need "3" and "5" though.

It effectively counts trailing zeroes, but I need something that counts leading zeroes. I could reverse the bit-order of the relevant word (16 bit) but afaik there's no x86 instruction for that, and anything manual for that would take way too many cycles. At least I don't know an algorithm that does it in sub ~5 cycles.


You seem to be mixing up bsr and bsf ?

And the index it gives is the index in the word, so you will need to substract it to 16 to have the number you wanted, that's one more cycle
Abductedonut
Profile Blog Joined December 2010
United States324 Posts
Last Edited: 2012-12-13 19:44:35
December 13 2012 19:43 GMT
#4331
On December 14 2012 04:24 heishe wrote:
bsr doesn't work, it scans from the right (don't suggest bsf, it is the same thing, it just starts the search from the other side ).
In the example binaries I gave, your method would return 1 for the first number, and three for the second I need "3" and "5" though.

It effectively counts trailing zeroes, but I need something that counts leading zeroes. I could reverse the bit-order of the relevant word (16 bit) but afaik there's no x86 instruction for that, and anything manual for that would take way too many cycles. At least I don't know an algorithm that does it in sub ~5 cycles.


Hi Heishe... Here's an idea... I'd love to program it for you but I have to take a final soon (This will probably require assembly... though I guess you could use the ugly struct trick in C to make nibbles )

Assume your number is in a 16-bit register. Example: 1111111011110000

Split the register into four 4-bit nibbles.. so (Or you can just have one nibble pointing to the top-most nibble in the register):
1111 1110 1111 0000

We know that 1111 is some constant value.

Check, starting from the top-most nibble to see if that nibble is equal to whatever value 1111 is. If it's not, then you know there is a zero in that bit pattern, and you can use more normal counting techniques to see how many bits are on the left of 1. If it is, you can increment your counter by four and move onto the next nibble set. Hope you get the idea. This should be pretty quick if you program it properly in assembly

*edit* haha, good catch on the bsr thing! Nevermind!
heishe
Profile Blog Joined June 2009
Germany2284 Posts
Last Edited: 2012-12-13 19:50:59
December 13 2012 19:43 GMT
#4332
On December 14 2012 04:29 Denar wrote:
Show nested quote +
On December 14 2012 04:24 heishe wrote:
bsr doesn't work, it scans from the right (don't suggest bsf, it is the same thing, it just starts the search from the other side ).
In the example binaries I gave, your method would return 1 for the first number, and three for the second I need "3" and "5" though.

It effectively counts trailing zeroes, but I need something that counts leading zeroes. I could reverse the bit-order of the relevant word (16 bit) but afaik there's no x86 instruction for that, and anything manual for that would take way too many cycles. At least I don't know an algorithm that does it in sub ~5 cycles.


You seem to be mixing up bsr and bsf ?

And the index it gives is the index in the word, so you will need to substract it to 16 to have the number you wanted, that's one more cycle


Oh my god... I'm dumb. Your reply motivated me to do a dummy test of bsr and bsf (I assumed they produce the same result). I wasted hours at work because I tested bsr & bsf incorrectly before and interpreted an answer of some guy o stackoverflow wrong.

Thank you very much.
If you value your soul, never look into the eye of a horse. Your soul will forever be lost in the void of the horse.
meadbert
Profile Blog Joined October 2010
United States681 Posts
December 13 2012 19:56 GMT
#4333
I tried __builtin_clz for gcc and it took 18 seconds for 6 billion lookups.

I also tried the really easy 8 bit lookup where you do a lookup on the first 8 bits and if it returns anything but 8 you are done.
If it returns 8 then the answer is 8 + lookup on the lower 8 bits.
That got 8 seconds.

I am guessing that gcc is not implementing clz with hardware or possibly it does not exist.


+ Show Spoiler +

unsigned char leftBitsFast(
unsigned int n)
{
unsigned char high = n >> 8;
unsigned char count = array[high];

if(count != 8) {
return count;
}
return 8 + array[n&255];
}

unsigned char leftBitsAsm(
unsigned short n)
{
unsigned short flipped = ~n;

if(flipped == 0) { /* clz undefined for 0 */
return 16;
}
return __builtin_clz(flipped) - 16;
}
Phunkapotamus
Profile Joined April 2010
United States496 Posts
December 13 2012 20:18 GMT
#4334
Game programmer here, we ask this question in interviews.

Brute force:
-Loop through all bits, count 'em all.

Faster, but uses more memory:
-Lookup tables of various sizes. Doesn't need to be for all 16 bits. Can do segments of 4 bits otherwise you're getting crazy.

New age cool answer that is somewhat acceptable:
-Do any of the two above, but fork to multiple threads.

Best answer that I wouldn't expect in an interview:
MIT Hackmem algorithm (http://gurmeet.net/puzzles/fast-bit-counting-routines/)
"Do a barrel roll"
CecilSunkure
Profile Blog Joined May 2010
United States2829 Posts
December 13 2012 21:37 GMT
#4335
On December 14 2012 05:18 Phunkapotamus wrote:
Game programmer here, we ask this question in interviews.

Brute force:
-Loop through all bits, count 'em all.

Faster, but uses more memory:
-Lookup tables of various sizes. Doesn't need to be for all 16 bits. Can do segments of 4 bits otherwise you're getting crazy.

New age cool answer that is somewhat acceptable:
-Do any of the two above, but fork to multiple threads.

Best answer that I wouldn't expect in an interview:
MIT Hackmem algorithm (http://gurmeet.net/puzzles/fast-bit-counting-routines/)

Didn't you make impossible scenarios maps for BW?
Blisse
Profile Blog Joined July 2010
Canada3710 Posts
Last Edited: 2012-12-13 21:51:28
December 13 2012 21:50 GMT
#4336
On December 14 2012 05:18 Phunkapotamus wrote:
Game programmer here, we ask this question in interviews.

Brute force:
-Loop through all bits, count 'em all.

Faster, but uses more memory:
-Lookup tables of various sizes. Doesn't need to be for all 16 bits. Can do segments of 4 bits otherwise you're getting crazy.

New age cool answer that is somewhat acceptable:
-Do any of the two above, but fork to multiple threads.

Best answer that I wouldn't expect in an interview:
MIT Hackmem algorithm (http://gurmeet.net/puzzles/fast-bit-counting-routines/)


where X is a binary number.

NOT X
CLZ X

Having a special function do it is cheating. :c
There is no one like you in the universe.
xavra41
Profile Joined January 2012
United States220 Posts
December 13 2012 23:18 GMT
#4337
Okay, so I Went through a giant 1500 page java book and did a big project involving 2k lines of code with gui and sql connection to a server to store/retrieve information. Does anyone know what the next step is in finding a job?
Deleted User 101379
Profile Blog Joined August 2010
4849 Posts
December 13 2012 23:43 GMT
#4338
On December 14 2012 08:18 xavra41 wrote:
Okay, so I Went through a giant 1500 page java book and did a big project involving 2k lines of code with gui and sql connection to a server to store/retrieve information. Does anyone know what the next step is in finding a job?


Sending your CV.
Craton
Profile Blog Joined December 2009
United States17255 Posts
Last Edited: 2012-12-14 00:00:14
December 13 2012 23:58 GMT
#4339
On December 14 2012 08:18 xavra41 wrote:
Okay, so I Went through a giant 1500 page java book and did a big project involving 2k lines of code with gui and sql connection to a server to store/retrieve information. Does anyone know what the next step is in finding a job?

That's roughly equal to a single college course, only without any "proof" of completion / understanding.

It's a useful skill, but also something taught to sophomores in one of their first handful of programming courses. In other words: you've a long way to go still.
twitch.tv/cratonz
xavra41
Profile Joined January 2012
United States220 Posts
December 14 2012 00:04 GMT
#4340
So what do I need before I can apply?
Prev 1 215 216 217 218 219 1032 Next
Please log in or register to reply.
Live Events Refresh
Next event in 16m
[ Submit Event ]
Live Streams
Refresh
StarCraft 2
JuggernautJason77
CosmosSc2 67
StarCraft: Brood War
Britney 11186
Calm 2314
Artosis 543
Mini 355
Soulkey 147
UpATreeSC 90
Aegong 88
NaDa 18
Dota 2
PGG 83
monkeys_forever67
Heroes of the Storm
Liquid`Hasu383
Khaldor147
Other Games
Grubby1627
ScreaM1373
shahzam516
C9.Mang0204
ToD186
Skadoodle171
Maynarde129
Trikslyr48
fpsfer 3
summit1g0
Organizations
Counter-Strike
PGL452
StarCraft 2
Blizzard YouTube
StarCraft: Brood War
BSLTrovo
sctven
[ Show 16 non-featured ]
StarCraft 2
• Hupsaiya 53
• davetesta39
• intothetv
• AfreecaTV YouTube
• Kozan
• IndyKCrew
• LaughNgamezSOOP
• Migwel
• sooper7s
StarCraft: Brood War
• BSLYoutube
• STPLYoutube
• ZZZeroYoutube
League of Legends
• Doublelift4144
Other Games
• imaqtpie1746
• Scarra700
• Shiphtur231
Upcoming Events
Replay Cast
16m
Wardi Open
12h 16m
Wardi Open
15h 46m
PiGosaur Monday
1d 1h
Replay Cast
1d 11h
Tenacious Turtle Tussle
2 days
The PondCast
2 days
OSC
2 days
WardiTV Invitational
3 days
Online Event
3 days
[ Show More ]
RSL Revival
4 days
RSL Revival
4 days
WardiTV Invitational
4 days
Afreeca Starleague
5 days
Snow vs Soma
Sparkling Tuna Cup
5 days
WardiTV Invitational
5 days
CrankTV Team League
5 days
RSL Revival
5 days
Wardi Open
6 days
CrankTV Team League
6 days
Liquipedia Results

Completed

Acropolis #4 - TS2
WardiTV TLMC #15
HCC Europe

Ongoing

BSL 21 Points
ASL Season 20
CSL 2025 AUTUMN (S18)
C-Race Season 1
IPSL Winter 2025-26
EC S1
Thunderpick World Champ.
CS Asia Championships 2025
ESL Pro League S22
StarSeries Fall 2025
FISSURE Playground #2
BLAST Open Fall 2025
BLAST Open Fall Qual
Esports World Cup 2025
BLAST Bounty Fall 2025
BLAST Bounty Fall Qual

Upcoming

SC4ALL: Brood War
BSL Season 21
BSL 21 Team A
BSL 21 Non-Korean Championship
RSL Offline Finals
RSL Revival: Season 3
Stellar Fest
SC4ALL: StarCraft II
CranK Gathers Season 2: SC II Pro Teams
eXTREMESLAND 2025
ESL Impact League Season 8
SL Budapest Major 2025
BLAST Rivals Fall 2025
IEM Chengdu 2025
PGL Masters Bucharest 2025
TLPD

1. ByuN
2. TY
3. Dark
4. Solar
5. Stats
6. Nerchio
7. sOs
8. soO
9. INnoVation
10. Elazer
1. Rain
2. Flash
3. EffOrt
4. Last
5. Bisu
6. Soulkey
7. Mini
8. Sharp
Sidebar Settings...

Advertising | Privacy Policy | Terms Of Use | Contact Us

Original banner artwork: Jim Warren
The contents of this webpage are copyright © 2025 TLnet. All Rights Reserved.