For the life of me, I can't remember how to set, delete, toggle or test a bit in a bitfield. Either I'm unsure or I mix them up because I rarely need these. So a "bit-cheat-sheet" would be nice to have.
For example:
flags = flags | FlagsEnum.Bit4; // Set bit 4.
or
if ((flags & FlagsEnum.Bit4)) == FlagsEnum.Bit4) // Is there a less verbose way?
Can you give examples of all the other common operations, preferably in C# syntax using a [Flags] enum?
This question is related to
c#
.net
enums
bit-manipulation
flags
The idiom is to use the bitwise or-equal operator to set bits:
flags |= 0x04;
To clear a bit, the idiom is to use bitwise and with negation:
flags &= ~0x04;
Sometimes you have an offset that identifies your bit, and then the idiom is to use these combined with left-shift:
flags |= 1 << offset;
flags &= ~(1 << offset);
To test a bit you would do the following: (assuming flags is a 32 bit number)
Test Bit:
if((flags & 0x08) == 0x08)flags = flags ^ 0x08;flags = flags & 0xFFFFFF7F;The idiom is to use the bitwise or-equal operator to set bits:
flags |= 0x04;
To clear a bit, the idiom is to use bitwise and with negation:
flags &= ~0x04;
Sometimes you have an offset that identifies your bit, and then the idiom is to use these combined with left-shift:
flags |= 1 << offset;
flags &= ~(1 << offset);
C++ syntax, assuming bit 0 is LSB, assuming flags is unsigned long:
Check if Set:
flags & (1UL << (bit to test# - 1))
Check if not set:
invert test !(flag & (...))
Set:
flag |= (1UL << (bit to set# - 1))
Clear:
flag &= ~(1UL << (bit to clear# - 1))
Toggle:
flag ^= (1UL << (bit to set# - 1))
The idiom is to use the bitwise or-equal operator to set bits:
flags |= 0x04;
To clear a bit, the idiom is to use bitwise and with negation:
flags &= ~0x04;
Sometimes you have an offset that identifies your bit, and then the idiom is to use these combined with left-shift:
flags |= 1 << offset;
flags &= ~(1 << offset);
.NET's built-in flag enum operations are unfortunately quite limited. Most of the time users are left with figuring out the bitwise operation logic.
In .NET 4, the method HasFlag was added to Enum which helps simplify user's code but unfortunately there are many problems with it.
HasFlag is not type-safe as it accepts any type of enum value argument, not just the given enum type.HasFlag is ambiguous as to whether it checks if the value has all or any of the flags provided by the enum value argument. It's all by the way.HasFlag is rather slow as it requires boxing which causes allocations and thus more garbage collections.Due in part to .NET's limited support for flag enums I wrote the OSS library Enums.NET which addresses each of these issues and makes dealing with flag enums much easier.
Below are some of the operations it provides along with their equivalent implementations using just the .NET framework.
.NET flags | otherFlags
Enums.NET flags.CombineFlags(otherFlags)
.NET flags & ~otherFlags
Enums.NET flags.RemoveFlags(otherFlags)
.NET flags & otherFlags
Enums.NET flags.CommonFlags(otherFlags)
.NET flags ^ otherFlags
Enums.NET flags.ToggleFlags(otherFlags)
.NET (flags & otherFlags) == otherFlags or flags.HasFlag(otherFlags)
Enums.NET flags.HasAllFlags(otherFlags)
.NET (flags & otherFlags) != 0
Enums.NET flags.HasAnyFlags(otherFlags)
.NET
Enumerable.Range(0, 64)
.Where(bit => ((flags.GetTypeCode() == TypeCode.UInt64 ? (long)(ulong)flags : Convert.ToInt64(flags)) & (1L << bit)) != 0)
.Select(bit => Enum.ToObject(flags.GetType(), 1L << bit))`
Enums.NET flags.GetFlags()
I'm trying to get these improvements incorporated into .NET Core and maybe eventually the full .NET Framework. You can check out my proposal here.
I did some more work on these extensions - You can find the code here
I wrote some extension methods that extend System.Enum that I use often... I'm not claiming that they are bulletproof, but they have helped... Comments removed...
namespace Enum.Extensions {
public static class EnumerationExtensions {
public static bool Has<T>(this System.Enum type, T value) {
try {
return (((int)(object)type & (int)(object)value) == (int)(object)value);
}
catch {
return false;
}
}
public static bool Is<T>(this System.Enum type, T value) {
try {
return (int)(object)type == (int)(object)value;
}
catch {
return false;
}
}
public static T Add<T>(this System.Enum type, T value) {
try {
return (T)(object)(((int)(object)type | (int)(object)value));
}
catch(Exception ex) {
throw new ArgumentException(
string.Format(
"Could not append value from enumerated type '{0}'.",
typeof(T).Name
), ex);
}
}
public static T Remove<T>(this System.Enum type, T value) {
try {
return (T)(object)(((int)(object)type & ~(int)(object)value));
}
catch (Exception ex) {
throw new ArgumentException(
string.Format(
"Could not remove value from enumerated type '{0}'.",
typeof(T).Name
), ex);
}
}
}
}
Then they are used like the following
SomeType value = SomeType.Grapes;
bool isGrapes = value.Is(SomeType.Grapes); //true
bool hasGrapes = value.Has(SomeType.Grapes); //true
value = value.Add(SomeType.Oranges);
value = value.Add(SomeType.Apples);
value = value.Remove(SomeType.Grapes);
bool hasOranges = value.Has(SomeType.Oranges); //true
bool isApples = value.Is(SomeType.Apples); //false
bool hasGrapes = value.Has(SomeType.Grapes); //false
C++ operations are: & | ^ ~ (for and, or, xor and not bitwise operations). Also of interest are >> and <<, which are bitshift operations.
So, to test for a bit being set in a flag, you would use: if (flags & 8) //tests bit 4 has been set
For the best performance and zero garbage, use this:
using System;
using T = MyNamespace.MyFlags;
namespace MyNamespace
{
[Flags]
public enum MyFlags
{
None = 0,
Flag1 = 1,
Flag2 = 2
}
static class MyFlagsEx
{
public static bool Has(this T type, T value)
{
return (type & value) == value;
}
public static bool Is(this T type, T value)
{
return type == value;
}
public static T Add(this T type, T value)
{
return type | value;
}
public static T Remove(this T type, T value)
{
return type & ~value;
}
}
}
To test a bit you would do the following: (assuming flags is a 32 bit number)
Test Bit:
if((flags & 0x08) == 0x08)flags = flags ^ 0x08;flags = flags & 0xFFFFFF7F;@Drew
Note that except in the simplest of cases, the Enum.HasFlag carries a heavy performance penalty in comparison to writing out the code manually. Consider the following code:
[Flags]
public enum TestFlags
{
One = 1,
Two = 2,
Three = 4,
Four = 8,
Five = 16,
Six = 32,
Seven = 64,
Eight = 128,
Nine = 256,
Ten = 512
}
class Program
{
static void Main(string[] args)
{
TestFlags f = TestFlags.Five; /* or any other enum */
bool result = false;
Stopwatch s = Stopwatch.StartNew();
for (int i = 0; i < 10000000; i++)
{
result |= f.HasFlag(TestFlags.Three);
}
s.Stop();
Console.WriteLine(s.ElapsedMilliseconds); // *4793 ms*
s.Restart();
for (int i = 0; i < 10000000; i++)
{
result |= (f & TestFlags.Three) != 0;
}
s.Stop();
Console.WriteLine(s.ElapsedMilliseconds); // *27 ms*
Console.ReadLine();
}
}
Over 10 million iterations, the HasFlags extension method takes a whopping 4793 ms, compared to the 27 ms for the standard bitwise implementation.
This was inspired by using Sets as indexers in Delphi, way back when:
/// Example of using a Boolean indexed property
/// to manipulate a [Flags] enum:
public class BindingFlagsIndexer
{
BindingFlags flags = BindingFlags.Default;
public BindingFlagsIndexer()
{
}
public BindingFlagsIndexer( BindingFlags value )
{
this.flags = value;
}
public bool this[BindingFlags index]
{
get
{
return (this.flags & index) == index;
}
set( bool value )
{
if( value )
this.flags |= index;
else
this.flags &= ~index;
}
}
public BindingFlags Value
{
get
{
return flags;
}
set( BindingFlags value )
{
this.flags = value;
}
}
public static implicit operator BindingFlags( BindingFlagsIndexer src )
{
return src != null ? src.Value : BindingFlags.Default;
}
public static implicit operator BindingFlagsIndexer( BindingFlags src )
{
return new BindingFlagsIndexer( src );
}
}
public static class Class1
{
public static void Example()
{
BindingFlagsIndexer myFlags = new BindingFlagsIndexer();
// Sets the flag(s) passed as the indexer:
myFlags[BindingFlags.ExactBinding] = true;
// Indexer can specify multiple flags at once:
myFlags[BindingFlags.Instance | BindingFlags.Static] = true;
// Get boolean indicating if specified flag(s) are set:
bool flatten = myFlags[BindingFlags.FlattenHierarchy];
// use | to test if multiple flags are set:
bool isProtected = ! myFlags[BindingFlags.Public | BindingFlags.NonPublic];
}
}
C++ syntax, assuming bit 0 is LSB, assuming flags is unsigned long:
Check if Set:
flags & (1UL << (bit to test# - 1))
Check if not set:
invert test !(flag & (...))
Set:
flag |= (1UL << (bit to set# - 1))
Clear:
flag &= ~(1UL << (bit to clear# - 1))
Toggle:
flag ^= (1UL << (bit to set# - 1))
@Drew
Note that except in the simplest of cases, the Enum.HasFlag carries a heavy performance penalty in comparison to writing out the code manually. Consider the following code:
[Flags]
public enum TestFlags
{
One = 1,
Two = 2,
Three = 4,
Four = 8,
Five = 16,
Six = 32,
Seven = 64,
Eight = 128,
Nine = 256,
Ten = 512
}
class Program
{
static void Main(string[] args)
{
TestFlags f = TestFlags.Five; /* or any other enum */
bool result = false;
Stopwatch s = Stopwatch.StartNew();
for (int i = 0; i < 10000000; i++)
{
result |= f.HasFlag(TestFlags.Three);
}
s.Stop();
Console.WriteLine(s.ElapsedMilliseconds); // *4793 ms*
s.Restart();
for (int i = 0; i < 10000000; i++)
{
result |= (f & TestFlags.Three) != 0;
}
s.Stop();
Console.WriteLine(s.ElapsedMilliseconds); // *27 ms*
Console.ReadLine();
}
}
Over 10 million iterations, the HasFlags extension method takes a whopping 4793 ms, compared to the 27 ms for the standard bitwise implementation.
C++ operations are: & | ^ ~ (for and, or, xor and not bitwise operations). Also of interest are >> and <<, which are bitshift operations.
So, to test for a bit being set in a flag, you would use: if (flags & 8) //tests bit 4 has been set
I did some more work on these extensions - You can find the code here
I wrote some extension methods that extend System.Enum that I use often... I'm not claiming that they are bulletproof, but they have helped... Comments removed...
namespace Enum.Extensions {
public static class EnumerationExtensions {
public static bool Has<T>(this System.Enum type, T value) {
try {
return (((int)(object)type & (int)(object)value) == (int)(object)value);
}
catch {
return false;
}
}
public static bool Is<T>(this System.Enum type, T value) {
try {
return (int)(object)type == (int)(object)value;
}
catch {
return false;
}
}
public static T Add<T>(this System.Enum type, T value) {
try {
return (T)(object)(((int)(object)type | (int)(object)value));
}
catch(Exception ex) {
throw new ArgumentException(
string.Format(
"Could not append value from enumerated type '{0}'.",
typeof(T).Name
), ex);
}
}
public static T Remove<T>(this System.Enum type, T value) {
try {
return (T)(object)(((int)(object)type & ~(int)(object)value));
}
catch (Exception ex) {
throw new ArgumentException(
string.Format(
"Could not remove value from enumerated type '{0}'.",
typeof(T).Name
), ex);
}
}
}
}
Then they are used like the following
SomeType value = SomeType.Grapes;
bool isGrapes = value.Is(SomeType.Grapes); //true
bool hasGrapes = value.Has(SomeType.Grapes); //true
value = value.Add(SomeType.Oranges);
value = value.Add(SomeType.Apples);
value = value.Remove(SomeType.Grapes);
bool hasOranges = value.Has(SomeType.Oranges); //true
bool isApples = value.Is(SomeType.Apples); //false
bool hasGrapes = value.Has(SomeType.Grapes); //false
For the best performance and zero garbage, use this:
using System;
using T = MyNamespace.MyFlags;
namespace MyNamespace
{
[Flags]
public enum MyFlags
{
None = 0,
Flag1 = 1,
Flag2 = 2
}
static class MyFlagsEx
{
public static bool Has(this T type, T value)
{
return (type & value) == value;
}
public static bool Is(this T type, T value)
{
return type == value;
}
public static T Add(this T type, T value)
{
return type | value;
}
public static T Remove(this T type, T value)
{
return type & ~value;
}
}
}
This was inspired by using Sets as indexers in Delphi, way back when:
/// Example of using a Boolean indexed property
/// to manipulate a [Flags] enum:
public class BindingFlagsIndexer
{
BindingFlags flags = BindingFlags.Default;
public BindingFlagsIndexer()
{
}
public BindingFlagsIndexer( BindingFlags value )
{
this.flags = value;
}
public bool this[BindingFlags index]
{
get
{
return (this.flags & index) == index;
}
set( bool value )
{
if( value )
this.flags |= index;
else
this.flags &= ~index;
}
}
public BindingFlags Value
{
get
{
return flags;
}
set( BindingFlags value )
{
this.flags = value;
}
}
public static implicit operator BindingFlags( BindingFlagsIndexer src )
{
return src != null ? src.Value : BindingFlags.Default;
}
public static implicit operator BindingFlagsIndexer( BindingFlags src )
{
return new BindingFlagsIndexer( src );
}
}
public static class Class1
{
public static void Example()
{
BindingFlagsIndexer myFlags = new BindingFlagsIndexer();
// Sets the flag(s) passed as the indexer:
myFlags[BindingFlags.ExactBinding] = true;
// Indexer can specify multiple flags at once:
myFlags[BindingFlags.Instance | BindingFlags.Static] = true;
// Get boolean indicating if specified flag(s) are set:
bool flatten = myFlags[BindingFlags.FlattenHierarchy];
// use | to test if multiple flags are set:
bool isProtected = ! myFlags[BindingFlags.Public | BindingFlags.NonPublic];
}
}
C++ syntax, assuming bit 0 is LSB, assuming flags is unsigned long:
Check if Set:
flags & (1UL << (bit to test# - 1))
Check if not set:
invert test !(flag & (...))
Set:
flag |= (1UL << (bit to set# - 1))
Clear:
flag &= ~(1UL << (bit to clear# - 1))
Toggle:
flag ^= (1UL << (bit to set# - 1))
C++ operations are: & | ^ ~ (for and, or, xor and not bitwise operations). Also of interest are >> and <<, which are bitshift operations.
So, to test for a bit being set in a flag, you would use: if (flags & 8) //tests bit 4 has been set
In .NET 4 you can now write:
flags.HasFlag(FlagsEnum.Bit4)
.NET's built-in flag enum operations are unfortunately quite limited. Most of the time users are left with figuring out the bitwise operation logic.
In .NET 4, the method HasFlag was added to Enum which helps simplify user's code but unfortunately there are many problems with it.
HasFlag is not type-safe as it accepts any type of enum value argument, not just the given enum type.HasFlag is ambiguous as to whether it checks if the value has all or any of the flags provided by the enum value argument. It's all by the way.HasFlag is rather slow as it requires boxing which causes allocations and thus more garbage collections.Due in part to .NET's limited support for flag enums I wrote the OSS library Enums.NET which addresses each of these issues and makes dealing with flag enums much easier.
Below are some of the operations it provides along with their equivalent implementations using just the .NET framework.
.NET flags | otherFlags
Enums.NET flags.CombineFlags(otherFlags)
.NET flags & ~otherFlags
Enums.NET flags.RemoveFlags(otherFlags)
.NET flags & otherFlags
Enums.NET flags.CommonFlags(otherFlags)
.NET flags ^ otherFlags
Enums.NET flags.ToggleFlags(otherFlags)
.NET (flags & otherFlags) == otherFlags or flags.HasFlag(otherFlags)
Enums.NET flags.HasAllFlags(otherFlags)
.NET (flags & otherFlags) != 0
Enums.NET flags.HasAnyFlags(otherFlags)
.NET
Enumerable.Range(0, 64)
.Where(bit => ((flags.GetTypeCode() == TypeCode.UInt64 ? (long)(ulong)flags : Convert.ToInt64(flags)) & (1L << bit)) != 0)
.Select(bit => Enum.ToObject(flags.GetType(), 1L << bit))`
Enums.NET flags.GetFlags()
I'm trying to get these improvements incorporated into .NET Core and maybe eventually the full .NET Framework. You can check out my proposal here.
I did some more work on these extensions - You can find the code here
I wrote some extension methods that extend System.Enum that I use often... I'm not claiming that they are bulletproof, but they have helped... Comments removed...
namespace Enum.Extensions {
public static class EnumerationExtensions {
public static bool Has<T>(this System.Enum type, T value) {
try {
return (((int)(object)type & (int)(object)value) == (int)(object)value);
}
catch {
return false;
}
}
public static bool Is<T>(this System.Enum type, T value) {
try {
return (int)(object)type == (int)(object)value;
}
catch {
return false;
}
}
public static T Add<T>(this System.Enum type, T value) {
try {
return (T)(object)(((int)(object)type | (int)(object)value));
}
catch(Exception ex) {
throw new ArgumentException(
string.Format(
"Could not append value from enumerated type '{0}'.",
typeof(T).Name
), ex);
}
}
public static T Remove<T>(this System.Enum type, T value) {
try {
return (T)(object)(((int)(object)type & ~(int)(object)value));
}
catch (Exception ex) {
throw new ArgumentException(
string.Format(
"Could not remove value from enumerated type '{0}'.",
typeof(T).Name
), ex);
}
}
}
}
Then they are used like the following
SomeType value = SomeType.Grapes;
bool isGrapes = value.Is(SomeType.Grapes); //true
bool hasGrapes = value.Has(SomeType.Grapes); //true
value = value.Add(SomeType.Oranges);
value = value.Add(SomeType.Apples);
value = value.Remove(SomeType.Grapes);
bool hasOranges = value.Has(SomeType.Oranges); //true
bool isApples = value.Is(SomeType.Apples); //false
bool hasGrapes = value.Has(SomeType.Grapes); //false
To test a bit you would do the following: (assuming flags is a 32 bit number)
Test Bit:
if((flags & 0x08) == 0x08)flags = flags ^ 0x08;flags = flags & 0xFFFFFF7F;I did some more work on these extensions - You can find the code here
I wrote some extension methods that extend System.Enum that I use often... I'm not claiming that they are bulletproof, but they have helped... Comments removed...
namespace Enum.Extensions {
public static class EnumerationExtensions {
public static bool Has<T>(this System.Enum type, T value) {
try {
return (((int)(object)type & (int)(object)value) == (int)(object)value);
}
catch {
return false;
}
}
public static bool Is<T>(this System.Enum type, T value) {
try {
return (int)(object)type == (int)(object)value;
}
catch {
return false;
}
}
public static T Add<T>(this System.Enum type, T value) {
try {
return (T)(object)(((int)(object)type | (int)(object)value));
}
catch(Exception ex) {
throw new ArgumentException(
string.Format(
"Could not append value from enumerated type '{0}'.",
typeof(T).Name
), ex);
}
}
public static T Remove<T>(this System.Enum type, T value) {
try {
return (T)(object)(((int)(object)type & ~(int)(object)value));
}
catch (Exception ex) {
throw new ArgumentException(
string.Format(
"Could not remove value from enumerated type '{0}'.",
typeof(T).Name
), ex);
}
}
}
}
Then they are used like the following
SomeType value = SomeType.Grapes;
bool isGrapes = value.Is(SomeType.Grapes); //true
bool hasGrapes = value.Has(SomeType.Grapes); //true
value = value.Add(SomeType.Oranges);
value = value.Add(SomeType.Apples);
value = value.Remove(SomeType.Grapes);
bool hasOranges = value.Has(SomeType.Oranges); //true
bool isApples = value.Is(SomeType.Apples); //false
bool hasGrapes = value.Has(SomeType.Grapes); //false
The idiom is to use the bitwise or-equal operator to set bits:
flags |= 0x04;
To clear a bit, the idiom is to use bitwise and with negation:
flags &= ~0x04;
Sometimes you have an offset that identifies your bit, and then the idiom is to use these combined with left-shift:
flags |= 1 << offset;
flags &= ~(1 << offset);
In .NET 4 you can now write:
flags.HasFlag(FlagsEnum.Bit4)
Source: Stackoverflow.com