Set bit

[lukasb1b]

• I have read CONTRIBUTING.md.
• This pull request is all my own work -- I have not plagiarized it.
• All filenames are in PascalCase.
• All functions and variable names follow Java naming conventions.
• All new algorithms have a URL in their comments that points to Wikipedia or other similar explanations.

[lukasb1b]

Issue #4350

[lukasb1b]

I want to add to the Issue that SetBit is already implemented and ClearBit is in other pullrequest

[siriak]

@vil02 @BamaCharanChhandogi please review

[BamaCharanChhandogi]

I want to add to the Issue that SetBit is already implemented and ClearBit is in other pullrequest

Hi, @lukasb1b,
All functions of single bit manipulation should be included in one file named 'Single Bit Manipulation,'. That would be better.

[vil02]

@siriak, @BamaCharanChhandogi, @lukasb1b: please have a look at my comment in the corresponding issue.

[vil02]

This is a very good start for the BitArray class.

[siriak]

I suggest adding this as-is and consolidating algorithms into a data structure in a following PR. There are already some other functions implemented in this manner and, as you have mentioned, there are open questions about the design of this BitArray.
@lukasb1b will you be able to consolidate these bit functions into a BitArray in the next PR? If no, somebody else could pick up this task.
In the meantime, we can discuss what we want to use as an underlying type.

[vil02]

In any case such functionality will be needed.

Suggested change

	public class GetBit {
	public static int getBit(int num, int get) {
	return (num >> get) & 1;
	}
	}
	public final class GetBit {
	private GetBit() {
	}
	public static boolean get(final int data, final int pos) {
	if (pos < 0 || pos >= Integer.SIZE) {
	throw new ArrayIndexOutOfBoundsException();
	}
	return ((data >> pos) & 1) > 0;
	}
	}

I am not sure what is the best way to make it accept any IntegralType - I could not find a convenient way how to get the SIZE.

Please add tests for the missing branches.

[siriak]

Let's stick to int32 then

[lukasb1b]

I can add all the SingleBit functions in onte but at first i think we should have a solution for the Problem i personally think a bit array is not as functional but we could do it generic like in the example below. And we add another function for arrays.

public class GetBit{

public static <T extends Number> T getBit(T num, int get) throws Exception {
    if(num instanceof Integer){
        return (T)(Integer.valueOf((num.intValue()>>get) & 1));
    }else{
        throw new Exception();
    }
}

[vil02]

I can add all the SingleBit functions in onte but at first i think we should have a solution for the Problem i personally think a bit array is not as functional but we could do it generic like in the example below. And we add another function for arrays.

public class GetBit{

public static <T extends Number> T getBit(T num, int get) throws Exception {
    if(num instanceof Integer){
        return (T)(Integer.valueOf((num.intValue()>>get) & 1));
    }else{
        throw new Exception();
    }
}

As suggested before, let stick to int for now. If you agree with my suggestion, please apply it and add missing tests.

I agree that it is a good idea to have one utilitiy class like BitOperations with public static methods get and set (this will be needed anyway in the BitArray).

[lukasb1b]

Hi I closed the request so you can implement it I dont get how you want to do it so I think its quicker if you do it yourself