Converting Java bitwise “and” operator over to Kotlin
I have a an array of bytes I'm calculating a checksum for in Java. And I'm trying to convert it to Kotlin. But the problem is that I am getting different values when calculating the -128 & 0xff in Java than it's equivalent in Kotlin. When passing in the -128, when I make the calculation in Java, it gives me a positive 128, but when I run it in Kotlin, it gives me a -128.
public class Bytes {
public static byte getByteArray() {
return new byte {-128};
}
public static int getJavaChecksum() {
int checksum = 0;
for (Byte b : getByteArray()) {
checksum += (b & 0xff);
}
return checksum;
}
}
This is my Kotlin code. I'm calling into the above bytes class to get the "byte array" I'm working with. So both pieces are running on the same input.
fun getKotlinChecksum(array: ByteArray): Byte {
var checksum = 0
for (b in array) {
checksum += (b and 0xFF.toByte())
}
return checksum.toByte()
}
fun main(args: Array<String>) {
println(Bytes.getJavaChecksum())
print(getKotlinChecksum(Bytes.getByteArray()))
}
The Java code is from a legacy code base that uses I2C to send over these bytes to a microcontroller. Is the Java just wrong? Or is there a way that I can get the 128 in the Kotlin code?
java kotlin bit-manipulation
asked Nov 13 '18 at 0:12
RafaRafa
99911841
add a comment |
I have a an array of bytes I'm calculating a checksum for in Java. And I'm trying to convert it to Kotlin. But the problem is that I am getting different values when calculating the -128 & 0xff in Java than it's equivalent in Kotlin. When passing in the -128, when I make the calculation in Java, it gives me a positive 128, but when I run it in Kotlin, it gives me a -128.
public class Bytes {
public static byte getByteArray() {
return new byte {-128};
}
public static int getJavaChecksum() {
int checksum = 0;
for (Byte b : getByteArray()) {
checksum += (b & 0xff);
}
return checksum;
}
}
This is my Kotlin code. I'm calling into the above bytes class to get the "byte array" I'm working with. So both pieces are running on the same input.
fun getKotlinChecksum(array: ByteArray): Byte {
var checksum = 0
for (b in array) {
checksum += (b and 0xFF.toByte())
}
return checksum.toByte()
}
fun main(args: Array<String>) {
println(Bytes.getJavaChecksum())
print(getKotlinChecksum(Bytes.getByteArray()))
}
The Java code is from a legacy code base that uses I2C to send over these bytes to a microcontroller. Is the Java just wrong? Or is there a way that I can get the 128 in the Kotlin code?
java kotlin bit-manipulation
asked Nov 13 '18 at 0:12
RafaRafa
99911841
add a comment |
I have a an array of bytes I'm calculating a checksum for in Java. And I'm trying to convert it to Kotlin. But the problem is that I am getting different values when calculating the -128 & 0xff in Java than it's equivalent in Kotlin. When passing in the -128, when I make the calculation in Java, it gives me a positive 128, but when I run it in Kotlin, it gives me a -128.
public class Bytes {
public static byte getByteArray() {
return new byte {-128};
}
public static int getJavaChecksum() {
int checksum = 0;
for (Byte b : getByteArray()) {
checksum += (b & 0xff);
}
return checksum;
}
}
This is my Kotlin code. I'm calling into the above bytes class to get the "byte array" I'm working with. So both pieces are running on the same input.
fun getKotlinChecksum(array: ByteArray): Byte {
var checksum = 0
for (b in array) {
checksum += (b and 0xFF.toByte())
}
return checksum.toByte()
}
fun main(args: Array<String>) {
println(Bytes.getJavaChecksum())
print(getKotlinChecksum(Bytes.getByteArray()))
}
The Java code is from a legacy code base that uses I2C to send over these bytes to a microcontroller. Is the Java just wrong? Or is there a way that I can get the 128 in the Kotlin code?
java kotlin bit-manipulation
asked Nov 13 '18 at 0:12
RafaRafa
99911841
I have a an array of bytes I'm calculating a checksum for in Java. And I'm trying to convert it to Kotlin. But the problem is that I am getting different values when calculating the -128 & 0xff in Java than it's equivalent in Kotlin. When passing in the -128, when I make the calculation in Java, it gives me a positive 128, but when I run it in Kotlin, it gives me a -128.
public class Bytes {
public static byte getByteArray() {
return new byte {-128};
}
public static int getJavaChecksum() {
int checksum = 0;
for (Byte b : getByteArray()) {
checksum += (b & 0xff);
}
return checksum;
}
}
This is my Kotlin code. I'm calling into the above bytes class to get the "byte array" I'm working with. So both pieces are running on the same input.
fun getKotlinChecksum(array: ByteArray): Byte {
var checksum = 0
for (b in array) {
checksum += (b and 0xFF.toByte())
}
return checksum.toByte()
}
fun main(args: Array<String>) {
println(Bytes.getJavaChecksum())
print(getKotlinChecksum(Bytes.getByteArray()))
}
The Java code is from a legacy code base that uses I2C to send over these bytes to a microcontroller. Is the Java just wrong? Or is there a way that I can get the 128 in the Kotlin code?
java kotlin bit-manipulation
java kotlin bit-manipulation
asked Nov 13 '18 at 0:12
RafaRafa
99911841
asked Nov 13 '18 at 0:12
RafaRafa
99911841
edited Nov 13 '18 at 0:45
Rafa
asked Nov 13 '18 at 0:12
RafaRafa
99911841
asked Nov 13 '18 at 0:12
RafaRafa
99911841
asked Nov 13 '18 at 0:12
RafaRafa
99911841
99911841
add a comment |
add a comment |
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
Returning a Byte means the function cannot return 128 no matter what, so that needs to be Int. The Java checksum does a "full" sum, not just the lowest byte of the sum. Similarly the bitwise AND cannot be done on bytes, that is useless, the sign extension (the AND with 0xFF is to remove the extended sign bits) would still happen. Then it could be written as a loop, Java style, but in Kotlin it probably makes more sense to write something like this:
fun getKotlinChecksum(array: ByteArray): Int {
return array.map({ it.toInt() and 0xFF }).sum()
}
answered Nov 13 '18 at 0:53
haroldharold
41.3k357108
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function () {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function () {
StackExchange.snippets.init();
});
});
}, "code-snippets");
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "1"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fstackoverflow.com%2fquestions%2f53271952%2fconverting-java-bitwise-and-operator-over-to-kotlin%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
Returning a Byte means the function cannot return 128 no matter what, so that needs to be Int. The Java checksum does a "full" sum, not just the lowest byte of the sum. Similarly the bitwise AND cannot be done on bytes, that is useless, the sign extension (the AND with 0xFF is to remove the extended sign bits) would still happen. Then it could be written as a loop, Java style, but in Kotlin it probably makes more sense to write something like this:
fun getKotlinChecksum(array: ByteArray): Int {
return array.map({ it.toInt() and 0xFF }).sum()
}
answered Nov 13 '18 at 0:53
haroldharold
41.3k357108
add a comment |
Returning a Byte means the function cannot return 128 no matter what, so that needs to be Int. The Java checksum does a "full" sum, not just the lowest byte of the sum. Similarly the bitwise AND cannot be done on bytes, that is useless, the sign extension (the AND with 0xFF is to remove the extended sign bits) would still happen. Then it could be written as a loop, Java style, but in Kotlin it probably makes more sense to write something like this:
fun getKotlinChecksum(array: ByteArray): Int {
return array.map({ it.toInt() and 0xFF }).sum()
}
answered Nov 13 '18 at 0:53
haroldharold
41.3k357108
add a comment |
Returning a Byte means the function cannot return 128 no matter what, so that needs to be Int. The Java checksum does a "full" sum, not just the lowest byte of the sum. Similarly the bitwise AND cannot be done on bytes, that is useless, the sign extension (the AND with 0xFF is to remove the extended sign bits) would still happen. Then it could be written as a loop, Java style, but in Kotlin it probably makes more sense to write something like this:
fun getKotlinChecksum(array: ByteArray): Int {
return array.map({ it.toInt() and 0xFF }).sum()
}
answered Nov 13 '18 at 0:53
haroldharold
41.3k357108
Returning a Byte means the function cannot return 128 no matter what, so that needs to be Int. The Java checksum does a "full" sum, not just the lowest byte of the sum. Similarly the bitwise AND cannot be done on bytes, that is useless, the sign extension (the AND with 0xFF is to remove the extended sign bits) would still happen. Then it could be written as a loop, Java style, but in Kotlin it probably makes more sense to write something like this:
fun getKotlinChecksum(array: ByteArray): Int {
return array.map({ it.toInt() and 0xFF }).sum()
}
answered Nov 13 '18 at 0:53
haroldharold
41.3k357108
answered Nov 13 '18 at 0:53
haroldharold
41.3k357108
answered Nov 13 '18 at 0:53
haroldharold
41.3k357108
answered Nov 13 '18 at 0:53
haroldharold
41.3k357108
41.3k357108
add a comment |
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Stack Overflow!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fstackoverflow.com%2fquestions%2f53271952%2fconverting-java-bitwise-and-operator-over-to-kotlin%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
