why does this result in -128?
int a = 128;
byte b = 0;
b =(byte) a;
why does this result in 44
int a = 300;
byte b = 0;
b =(byte) a;
I think I understand the fact that you wouldn't cast this way. Just trying to understand the output. If I am correct you would use casting when you have something like this
int a = 50;
byte b = 0;
b = (byte) a * 2;
Although 50 * 2 = 100 which is in the range of byte, the use of the operator automatically converts the expression to an interger. Thanks for whatever you care share.
Chad McAte wrote:why does this result in -128?
int a = 128;
byte b = 0;
b =(byte) a;
The bit pattern for a 128 value int is ... 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 1000 0000. When you explicitly cast it to a byte, even though this value doesn't fall into the range of the byte, the compiler will use the same bit pattern (for the lower 8 bits only). And under twos complement rules, the bit pattern of 1000 0000, as a byte is -128.
Chad McAte wrote:
why does this result in 44
int a = 300;
byte b = 0;
b =(byte) a;
The bit pattern for a 300 value int is ... 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 0001 0010 1100. When you explicitly cast it to a byte, even though this value doesn't fall into the range of the byte, the compiler will use the same bit pattern (for the lower 8 bits only). And under twos complement rules, the bit pattern of 0010 1100, as a byte is 44.
