All the standard integer type have a pub const BITS. Unfortunately the only way to get at them is by spelling their name, i.e. u32::BITS. Would it be stupid to therefore resort to something like: trait BitWide { const BITS: u32; fn width(&self) -> u32 { Self::BITS } } macro_rules! bitwide_im…

I know that's perhaps not a lot of fun, but there's next_power_of_two() on all integer types.

Stupid or genius? Getting at the BITS

EDEADLINK August 17, 2024, 6:33pm 3

I'm trying to round up to next power of two (for fun).
Which is 1 << (u32::BITS - x.leading_zeros() - 1); for a u32 x.
But I'd rather not write down the type.

TWiR quote of the week

Topic		Replies	Views
Why the return type of `int.leading_zeros` is `u32` of `u8`? help	12	915	June 1, 2020
Shrinking bitset with compile time known length	3	1000	February 27, 2023
Is `next_power_of_two` inefficient, or am I missing something? help	6	1479	December 11, 2020
Making a type level type function with `typenum` crate help	23	1336	June 8, 2024
Finding the power of a number help	4	1973	January 16, 2020

Stupid or genius? Getting at the BITS

Related topics