I was just going through some basic stuff as I am learning C. I came upon a question to multiply a number by 7 without using the * operator. Basically it\'s like this
<In C#:
private static string Multi(int a, int b)
{
if (a == 0 || b == 0)
return "0";
bool isnegative = false;
if (a < 0 || b < 0)
{
isnegative = true;
a = Math.Abs(a);
b = Math.Abs(b);
}
int sum = 0;
if (a > b)
{
for (int i = 1; i <= b; i++)
{
sum += a;
}
}
else
{
for (int i = 1; i <= a; i++)
{
sum += b;
}
}
if (isnegative == true)
return "-" + sum.ToString();
else
return sum.ToString();
}
package com.amit.string;
// Here I am passing two values, 7 and 3 and method getResult() will
// return 21 without use of any operator except the increment operator, ++.
//
public class MultiplyTwoNumber {
public static void main(String[] args) {
int a = 7;
int b = 3;
System.out.println(new MultiplyTwoNumber().getResult(a, b));
}
public int getResult(int i, int j) {
int result = 0;
// Check for loop logic it is key thing it will go 21 times
for (int k = 0; k < i; k++) {
for (int p = 0; p < j; p++) {
result++;
}
}
return result;
}
}
Mathematically speaking, multiplication distributes over addition. Essentially, this means:
x * (a + b + c ...) = (x * a) + (x * b) + (x * c) ...
Any real number (in your case 7
), can be presented as a series of additions (such as 8 + (-1)
, since subtraction is really just addition going the wrong way). This allows you to represent any single multiplication statement as an equivalent series of multiplication statements, which will come up with the same result:
x * 7
= x * (8 + (-1))
= (x * 8) + (x * (-1))
= (x * 8) - (x * 1)
= (x * 8) - x
The bitwise shift operator essentially just multiplies or divides a number by a power of 2. So long as your equation is only dealing with such values, bit shifting can be used to replace all occurrence of the multiplication operator.
(x * 8) - x = (x * 23) - x = (x << 3) - x
A similar strategy can be used on any other integer, and it makes no difference whether it's odd or even.
public static int multiply(int a, int b)
{
int temp = 0;
if (b == 0) return 0;
for (int ii = 0; ii < abs(b); ++ii) {
temp = temp + a;
}
return b >= 0 ? temp : -temp;
}
public static int abs(int val) {
return val>=0 ? val : -val;
}
One evening, I found that I was extremely bored, and cooked this up:
#include <iostream>
typedef unsigned int uint32;
uint32 add(uint32 a, uint32 b) {
do {
uint32 s = a ^ b;
uint32 c = a & b;
a = s;
b = c << 1;
} while (a & b)
return (a | b)
}
uint32 mul(uint32 a, uint32 b) {
uint32 total = 0;
do {
uint32 s1 = a & (-(b & 1))
b >>= 1; a <<= 1;
total = add(s1, total)
} while (b)
return total;
}
int main(void) {
using namespace std;
uint32 a, b;
cout << "Enter two numbers to be multiplied: ";
cin >> a >> b;
cout << "Total: " << mul(a,b) << endl;
return 0;
}
The code above should be quite self-explanatory, as I tried to keep it as simple as possible. It should work, more or less, the way a CPU might perform these operations. The only bug I'm aware of is that a
is not permitted to be greater than 32,767 and b
is not permitted to be large enough to overflow a
(that is, multiply overflow is not handled, so 64-bit results are not possible). It should even work with negative numbers, provided the inputs are appropriately reinterpret_cast<>
.
A JavaScript approach for positive numbers
function recursiveMultiply(num1, num2){
const bigger = num1 > num2 ? num1 : num2;
const smaller = num1 <= num2 ? num1 : num2;
const indexIncrement = 1;
const resultIncrement = bigger;
return recursiveMultiplyHelper(bigger, smaller, 0, indexIncrement, resultIncrement)
}
function recursiveMultiplyHelper(num1, num2, index, indexIncrement, resultIncrement){
let result = 0;
if (index === num2){
return result;
}
if ((index+indexIncrement+indexIncrement) >= num2){
indexIncrement = 1;
resultIncrement = num1;
} else{
indexIncrement += indexIncrement;
resultIncrement += resultIncrement;
}
result = recursiveMultiplyHelper(num1, num2, (index+indexIncrement), indexIncrement, resultIncrement);
result += resultIncrement;
console.log(num1, num2, index, result);
return result;
}