# counting these number of 1s and 0s in the given 7-bit binary sequence .

#### saichand

Joined Sep 15, 2015
2
can anyone plz help me bye answering this question below

"counting these number of 1s and 0s in the given 7-bit binary sequence ." where is this applicable in computer architecture
i mean where are we going to use this combinational logic circuit ? in which concept and concern?

also real time applications if any??

#### Alec_t

Joined Sep 17, 2013
11,172
Have you heard of parity checking?

#### Papabravo

Joined Feb 24, 2006
13,565
can anyone plz help me bye answering this question below

"counting these number of 1s and 0s in the given 7-bit binary sequence ." where is this applicable in computer architecture
i mean where are we going to use this combinational logic circuit ? in which concept and concern?

also real time applications if any??
As far as I know there is no possible application for such a function. It appears to be a pedagogical exercise.

#### jpanhalt

Joined Jan 18, 2008
9,130
Despite being a seemingly worthless exercise, here's a routine I have used for 8-bit numbers. Author is unknown, but I believe I got it off PicList. A 7-bit number would be right justified (typical).

John

#### ScottWang

Joined Aug 23, 2012
6,885
Despite being a seemingly worthless exercise, here's a routine I have used for 8-bit numbers. Author is unknown, but I believe I got it off PicList. A 7-bit number would be right justified (typical).

John
The members can't given the answer directly in this forum, only can be guiding, asking and tell them what to do.

#### jpanhalt

Joined Jan 18, 2008
9,130
Hi Scott,

To which @WBahn replied (post #2)
My guess (and it's not much more than that) is that it is a neon bulb with a radioactive source in it. If I'm right, the idea is that it will fire and turn on when the voltage from the inverter reaches a high enough voltage such that the flash could be fired.
and the second respondent confirmed that answer.

More to the specifics of your response, I believe it was Bertus who gave the TS three links that specifically addressed how to count 1's and 0's, which is what I believe the TS asked.

Alec_t was the first to mention parity, which is what many people may have thought the answer was, but parity does not tell the number of 1's and 0's per se. Why did you chose to comment on my response and not quote Bertus to inform him of the "rules" much earlier?

Now, for the second part of the question, which I believe is far more important than the mechanics of calculating parity, no one here has actually answered that, except Alec_t gave it a name.

John

#### ScottWang

Joined Aug 23, 2012
6,885
Hi Scott,

To which @WBahn replied (post #2) and the second respondent confirmed that answer.

More to the specifics of your response, I believe it was Bertus who gave the TS three links that specifically addressed how to count 1's and 0's, which is what I believe the TS asked.

Alec_t was the first to mention parity, which is what many people may have thought the answer was, but parity does not tell the number of 1's and 0's per se. Why did you chose to comment on my response and not quote Bertus to inform him of the "rules" much earlier?

Now, for the second part of the question, which I believe is far more important than the mechanics of calculating parity, no one here has actually answered that, except Alec_t gave it a name.

John
What I said the direct answer are meant to write the complete code, draw the circuit and doing the math or calculation, of course you can write the code, but that is just for hint, do the math or calculation also just a little, sometimes, paste a link is just let the student to study first by himself, you just do as you can to guide him under some limited, the purpose is for the student to study something, not just get the answer, thank you.

#### jpanhalt

Joined Jan 18, 2008
9,130
So you draw a distinction between providing code and providing answers that are not in code, as in the first example I cited. Sorry, I don't see that distinction. Maybe you can explain, so I won't make that mistake again.

BTW, parity with or without code does not actually answer the TS's question as stated. Is giving someone the word to look up OK with you?

John

#### ScottWang

Joined Aug 23, 2012
6,885
So you draw a distinction between providing code and providing answers that are not in code, as in the first example I cited. Sorry, I don't see that distinction. Maybe you can explain, so I won't make that mistake again.

BTW, parity with or without code does not actually answer the TS's question as stated. Is giving someone the word to look up OK with you?

John
I can't give you too much limited, you just remember that no direct answer(answer a name is ok), just give the hint and guide him what to learn, what to do ... (most note in #8)

You can see some more from WBahn, what he did and what he asked, you will find your way, good luck.

#### jpanhalt

Joined Jan 18, 2008
9,130

John

#### WBahn

Joined Mar 31, 2012
25,597
What information is given is very context sensitive. Even as someone who tries very hard not to just give out homework answers, if I have the impression that the question being asked is more about understanding the homework than BEING the homework, I will me much more willing to provide a direct answer. The neon bulb question was a case in point. I had no indication that the point of the homework was to see if they knew what that symbol was. I could have been wrong.

#### GopherT

Joined Nov 23, 2012
8,012
Despite being a seemingly worthless exercise, here's a routine I have used for 8-bit numbers. Author is unknown, but I believe I got it off PicList. A 7-bit number would be right justified (typical).

John
In something missing, John?

#### jpanhalt

Joined Jan 18, 2008
9,130
Yes, a moderator deleted the offensive code that I had attached.

In full accord with WBahn's philosophical statement, I interpreted the question to be related to: " where is this applicable in computer architecture," not programming per se. Apparently, I lack Mr. WBahn's faculty to divine the true meaning of a question, i.e., "being asked is more about understanding the homework than BEING the homework," and simply rely too much on the actual words the poster uses.

It appears there is a rule that we can give links to the answer, but not the answer itself. As a lawyer might say, that is a distinction without a difference, but that is what school is today, and it appears this forum intends to support that view. In any event, it is the last code I will be posting on this forum, unless I am the one asking for help.

John

#### saichand

Joined Sep 15, 2015
2
I can't give you too much limited, you just remember that no direct answer(answer a name is ok), just give the hint and guide him what to learn, what to do ... (most note in #8)

You can see some more from WBahn, what he did and what he asked, you will find your way, good luck.
thank u all fr ur kind replies! i ve gained the concept and its neccesity of function stated above ! actually i need to implement the hardware part of that function using combinational circuits !! but not coding part ! i want to know abt the applications ., major application or purpose of that function and i came to know thank u Mr.Alec_T and everyone who tried to help me

#### WBahn

Joined Mar 31, 2012
25,597
Yes, a moderator deleted the offensive code that I had attached.

In full accord with WBahn's philosophical statement, I interpreted the question to be related to: " where is this applicable in computer architecture," not programming per se. Apparently, I lack Mr. WBahn's faculty to divine the true meaning of a question, i.e., "being asked is more about understanding the homework than BEING the homework," and simply rely too much on the actual words the poster uses.

It appears there is a rule that we can give links to the answer, but not the answer itself. As a lawyer might say, that is a distinction without a difference, but that is what school is today, and it appears this forum intends to support that view. In any event, it is the last code I will be posting on this forum, unless I am the one asking for help.

John
Why are you insisting on dragging me into this? You dredge up something I posted in a completely unrelated thread and specifically bring it to my attention with an alert. I try to clarify why I posted what I did -- and I even acknowledged that I might have misinterpreted what the context was and might have been wrong to post what I did. Then you get pissed because something you posted was apparently deleted by some moderator and now it's MY fault and you feel it warranted to sling insults my way.

#### WBahn

Joined Mar 31, 2012
25,597
can anyone plz help me bye answering this question below

"counting these number of 1s and 0s in the given 7-bit binary sequence ." where is this applicable in computer architecture
i mean where are we going to use this combinational logic circuit ? in which concept and concern?

also real time applications if any??
I can't give you a specific application of that specific requirement, but there are many applications in which you have to detect certain patterns within a data stream and respond accordingly. As just one example you might have a video stream that uses a specific pattern to identify the start of each video frame. That means that you have to ensure that that pattern never occurs anywhere within the actual video data. But since it certainly could occur, you have to have a circuit that, in real time, is monitoring the stream and, if it detects that pattern, modifies it in such a way that it won't be detected as a framing pattern. But, of course, the system at the other end has to detect that the data was altered and restore the data back to its correct pattern.

Similarly, you have error detection and correction codes that are inserted into data streams and that have to be detected, decoded, and acted upon by systems in real time. Every packet of data traversing the internet has such codes that have to be analyzed at every hop the packet takes and that has to happen in real time with very low latency.

But in general, the exercise you are working on may not -- probably doesn't -- map directly to any particular real-world requirement. It is an exercise aimed to help you develop a set of skills and techniques that you are presently learning and is intended to push you a bit while not requiring knowledge or skills that you haven't gotten to yet in your education.

#### jpanhalt

Joined Jan 18, 2008
9,130
Why are you insisting on dragging me into this? You dredge up something I posted in a completely unrelated thread and specifically bring it to my attention with an alert. I try to clarify why I posted what I did -- and I even acknowledged that I might have misinterpreted what the context was and might have been wrong to post what I did. Then you get pissed because something you posted was apparently deleted by some moderator and now it's MY fault and you feel it warranted to sling insults my way.
Wow, you need to re-read my reply. The only thing I criticized you for was being so pedantic in your response to my comment. In fact, you did not simply stop at identifying the symbol, you went on to explain how the circuit worked, thus not only identifying the symbol, but in all likelihood answering the assigned question. Why is the thread relevant? It illustrated the double standard practiced actively by moderators on this site. As I stated previously, there is no difference between giving links and citing directly from a link. Nevertheless, Scott Wang chose me to reprimand.

For the record, I am not pissed at you in the least. I am fed up with the poor communication by some moderators and double standards that are applied at AAC. Ironically, the TS made it clear (post#15) that he was not interested in the code either -- a point I also made earlier based on the black and white of his question.

John

#### ScottWang

Joined Aug 23, 2012
6,885
Wow, you need to re-read my reply. The only thing I criticized you for was being so pedantic in your response to my comment. In fact, you did not simply stop at identifying the symbol, you went on to explain how the circuit worked, thus not only identifying the symbol, but in all likelihood answering the assigned question. Why is the thread relevant? It illustrated the double standard practiced actively by moderators on this site. As I stated previously, there is no difference between giving links and citing directly from a link. Nevertheless, Scott Wang chose me to reprimand.

For the record, I am not pissed at you in the least. I am fed up with the poor communication by some moderators and double standards that are applied at AAC. Ironically, the TS made it clear (post#15) that he was not interested in the code either -- a point I also made earlier based on the black and white of his question.

John
I just give you a hint just doing the guiding as this, where is the reprimand come from and where is only choose you?

#### WBahn

Joined Mar 31, 2012
25,597
Wow, you need to re-read my reply. The only thing I criticized you for was being so pedantic in your response to my comment. In fact, you did not simply stop at identifying the symbol, you went on to explain how the circuit worked, thus not only identifying the symbol, but in all likelihood answering the assigned question. Why is the thread relevant? It illustrated the double standard practiced actively by moderators on this site. As I stated previously, there is no difference between giving links and citing directly from a link. Nevertheless, Scott Wang chose me to reprimand.

For the record, I am not pissed at you in the least. I am fed up with the poor communication by some moderators and double standards that are applied at AAC. Ironically, the TS made it clear (post#15) that he was not interested in the code either -- a point I also made earlier based on the black and white of his question.

John
How was I being "so pendantic" -- I merely gave a short explanation of the criteria I try to use in deciding how I respond to questions in Homework Help. I acknowledged that I could have been wrong. So why try to further establish that I might have been wrong? To what end? Fine. Let's stipulate that I was wrong and let's even say that I should have told the person that they had to make their best guess at what the symbol might be and then only give them hints. I will freely admit that there have been a few times that I gave out too much too quickly. Sometimes I didn't realize that I was responding to a post that was (or should have been) in Homework Help. A couple times I was called on it and each time I acknowledged it. Heck, a couple times I called myself on it.

You seem to believe that you have the right to expect absolutely perfect, lock-step, and uniform decision making on the part of volunteer moderators who make their best effort on a case-by-case basis in their spare time. There's no double standard at play -- there is simply a range of gray about what does and what does not venture into territory that needs to be moderated and that range of gray varies from one moderator to another. It is also very context sensitive so the same moderator might make a different decision tomorrow than they made yesterday based on a laundry list of factors. That's life. Even professionally maintained forums have those issues -- forums such as this are simply significantly more variable. Overall, the amount of non-spam moderation that takes place here is VERY light compared to many other forums.

Even before I was a moderator, I would comment on posts that I believed went WAY too far in just providing the answer (usually in a somewhat sarcastic vein, but sometimes not). Now that I am a moderator I do the exact same thing. I have yet to delete or modify ANY post based on an assessment of whether it went too far in this regard. If nothing else, I generally believe that leaving it there and commenting on it serves a better purpose of trying to illustrate what crosses the line than the potential (and probably already done) damage of leaving the response intact. Other moderators may take a different stance make their own decisions about how to handle this issue. If you are expecting that we are going to develop pages and pages of standards that have to be followed or that we are going to discuss every single instance and come to a consensus decision then you are dreaming -- and even if we did that there would still be plenty of variability case to case. Right now there are about four active moderators. I don't know about the others, but I have a more-than-full-time job and can spend maybe half an hour a day (spread out in a minute here and two minutes there), if that, doing mod-related stuff. Most of that time is spent dealing with spammers with the (distant) second place going to dealing with instances of members devolving into flame exchanges. If we become even slightly bureaucratic in how day-to-day tasks are done with the intent of improving consistency, then it will immediately exceed the amount of time I can justify spending on this at all.