short

I'm currently using Firebase 11.2.0 and unable to create a short dynamic link successfully My code to create the long link is: val link = "https://example.com/param/id" val dynamicLink = FirebaseDynamicLinks.getInstance().createDynamicLink() .setLink(Uri.parse(link)) .setDynamicLinkDomain("v53sr.app.goo.gl") .setAndroidParameters(DynamicLink.AndroidParameters.Builder("com.greelionsoft.mareas.espana") .setMinimumVersion(22) .build()) .buildDynamicLink() This long link code can be shared via intent and works as expected but it's way too long. Then the code to create shortlink:

I was wondering why we can do: Long l = 2L; Float f = 2f; Double d = 2d; or even Double d = new Double(2); and not Short s = 2s; //or whatever letter it could be nor Short s = new Short(2); //I know in this case 2 is an int but couldn't it be casted internally or something? Why do we need to take the constructors either with a String or a short. But you can do this: Short s = 2; Or this: Short s = new Short((short)2); Or this: Short s = new Short("2"); Any of the above will work as long as the number is in the range [-2^15, 2^15-1] One of the main rules in Java is that any mathematical

so what I have is a short[] array which represents the raw data of a WAV file. This means it doesn't include any header or footer information which is usually included. In order to play this audio, I need to convert it to a stream of some sort, unfortunately the data in this short[] array is Int16 and many of the values exceed 255, therefore cannot be converted to bytes and cannot be converted to a stream. Does anyone have any idea how I would be able to play this audio data? You can convert the short array back to a byte array: short[] sampleData = ... byte[] byteArray = new byte[sampleData

Doesn't bitwise-ANDing with 0xff essentially mean getting the same value back, for that matter, in this code? byte[] packet = reader.readPacket(); short sh; sh = packet[1]; sh &= 0xFF; System.out.print(sh+" "); Weirdly, I get a -1 if that ANDing is not included but a 255 when included Could someone explain the reason? As I see it 0xff is just 1111 1111. Isn't it? Yes, 0xff is just 1111 1111 . But this is attempting to display the unsigned byte value, even though in Java byte s are signed. The value 0xff is -1 for a signed byte , but it's 255 in a short . When a byte value of 0xff is read,

I have the following code: short myShort = 23948; byte myByte = (byte)myShort; Now I wasn't expecting myByte to contain the value 23948. I would have guessed that it would contain 255 (I believe the largest value for a byte). However, it contains 140, and it made me wonder why; what is actually going on behind the scenes? Please note that I am not looking for someone to solve the problem that 23948 cannot fit into a byte, I am merely wondering about the underlying implementation Short is a 2-byte type and a byte is, well, a single byte. When you cast from two bytes to one you're forcing the

I have been encountering this error for my project, which involves working with Digital Audio Signals. So I have been getting the amplitude values and recently encountered this error. This occurs when the amplitude value encountered is "-32768" upon debugging. I am storing the values in a short[] array. I have a hunch that it has something to do with max/minimum values (I use Math.Abs) but I am unsure on how to handle it. Can someone help? Thanks! 16 bit signed int ( short ) takes values between -32,768 and 32,767. Negating -32768, or getting the absolute value, is impossible to do inside a 16

My question is basically about how the C# compiler handles memory allocation of small datatypes. I do know that for example operators like add are defined on int and not on short and thus computations will be executed as if the shorts are int members. Assuming the following: There's no business logic/validation logic associated with the choice of short as a datatype We're not doing anything with unsafe code Does using the short datatype wherever possible reduce the memory footprint of my application and is it advisable to do so? Or is using short and the like not worth the effort as the