天真的解决方案

时间复杂度为O(no。n的比特数)

int countSet(unsigned int n)
{
    int res=0;
    while(n!=0){
      res += (n&1);
      n >>= 1;      // logical right shift, like C unsigned or Java >>>
    }
   return res;
}

Brian Kerningam的算法

时间复杂度为O(n中设置位的个数)

int countSet(unsigned int n)
{
  int res=0;
  while(n != 0)
  {
    n = (n & (n-1));
    res++;
  }
  return res;
} 

32位数字的查找表方法-在这种方法中，我们将32位数字分解为4个8位数字的块

时间复杂度为O(1)

static unsigned char table[256]; /* the table size is 256,
                        the number of values i&0xFF (8 bits) can have */

void initialize() //holds the number of set bits from 0 to 255
{
  table[0]=0;
  for(unsigned int i=1;i<256;i++)
     table[i]=(i&1)+table[i>>1];
}

int countSet(unsigned int n)
{
  // 0xff is hexadecimal representation of 8 set bits.
  int res=table[n & 0xff];
  n=n>>8;
  res=res+ table[n & 0xff];
  n=n>>8;
  res=res+ table[n & 0xff];
  n=n>>8;
  res=res+ table[n & 0xff];
  return res;
}

当你写出比特模式时，“黑客的喜悦”比特旋转变得更加清晰。

unsigned int bitCount(unsigned int x)
{
  x = ((x >> 1) & 0b01010101010101010101010101010101)
     + (x       & 0b01010101010101010101010101010101);
  x = ((x >> 2) & 0b00110011001100110011001100110011)
     + (x       & 0b00110011001100110011001100110011); 
  x = ((x >> 4) & 0b00001111000011110000111100001111)
     + (x       & 0b00001111000011110000111100001111); 
  x = ((x >> 8) & 0b00000000111111110000000011111111)
     + (x       & 0b00000000111111110000000011111111); 
  x = ((x >> 16)& 0b00000000000000001111111111111111)
     + (x       & 0b00000000000000001111111111111111); 
  return x;
}

第一步将偶数位加到奇数位上，产生每两个位的和。其他步骤将高阶数据块添加到低阶数据块，将数据块的大小一直增加一倍，直到最终计数占用整个int。

我提供了另一个未提及的算法，称为并行，从这里取。它的优点是它是通用的，这意味着代码对于8、16、32、64和128位大小是相同的。

我检查了它的值的正确性和时间的数量为2^26位大小为8,16,32和64位。请看下面的时间安排。

该算法是第一个代码片段。这里提到另外两个只是为了参考，因为我测试和比较了它们。

算法是用c++编写的，是通用的，但它可以很容易地应用到旧的C中。

#include <type_traits>
#include <cstdint>

template <typename IntT>
inline size_t PopCntParallel(IntT n) {
    // https://graphics.stanford.edu/~seander/bithacks.html#CountBitsSetParallel
    using T = std::make_unsigned_t<IntT>;

    T v = T(n);
    v = v - ((v >> 1) & (T)~(T)0/3);                           // temp
    v = (v & (T)~(T)0/15*3) + ((v >> 2) & (T)~(T)0/15*3);      // temp
    v = (v + (v >> 4)) & (T)~(T)0/255*15;                      // temp
    return size_t((T)(v * ((T)~(T)0/255)) >> (sizeof(T) - 1) * 8); // count
}

下面是我比较的两种算法。一个是带有循环的Kernighan简单方法，从这里开始。

template <typename IntT>
inline size_t PopCntKernighan(IntT n) {
    // http://graphics.stanford.edu/~seander/bithacks.html#CountBitsSetKernighan
    using T = std::make_unsigned_t<IntT>;
    T v = T(n);
    size_t c;
    for (c = 0; v; ++c)
        v &= v - 1; // Clear the least significant bit set
    return c;
}

另一个是使用内置的__popcnt16()/__popcnt()/__popcnt64() MSVC的内在(doc在这里)。或CLang/GCC (doc)的__builtin_popcount。这个内在应该提供一个非常优化的版本，可能是硬件:

#ifdef _MSC_VER
    // https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/cpp/intrinsics/popcnt16-popcnt-popcnt64?view=msvc-160
    #include <intrin.h>
    #define popcnt16 __popcnt16
    #define popcnt32 __popcnt
    #define popcnt64 __popcnt64
#else
    // https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Other-Builtins.html
    #define popcnt16 __builtin_popcount
    #define popcnt32 __builtin_popcount
    #define popcnt64 __builtin_popcountll
#endif

template <typename IntT>
inline size_t PopCntBuiltin(IntT n) {
    using T = std::make_unsigned_t<IntT>;
    T v = T(n);
    if constexpr(sizeof(IntT) <= 2)
        return popcnt16(uint16_t(v));
    else if constexpr(sizeof(IntT) <= 4)
        return popcnt32(uint32_t(v));
    else if constexpr(sizeof(IntT) <= 8)
        return popcnt64(uint64_t(v));
    else
        static_assert([]{ return false; }());
}

以下是计时，以纳秒为单位。所有的计时都是对2^26个随机数进行的。比较了所有三种算法的计时以及8、16、32和64之间的所有比特大小。总的来说，所有测试在我的机器上花费了16秒。使用了高分辨率时钟。

08 bit Builtin 8.2 ns
08 bit Parallel 8.2 ns
08 bit Kernighan 26.7 ns

16 bit Builtin 7.7 ns
16 bit Parallel 7.7 ns
16 bit Kernighan 39.7 ns

32 bit Builtin 7.0 ns
32 bit Parallel 7.0 ns
32 bit Kernighan 47.9 ns

64 bit Builtin 7.5 ns
64 bit Parallel 7.5 ns
64 bit Kernighan 59.4 ns

128 bit Builtin 7.8 ns
128 bit Parallel 13.8 ns
128 bit Kernighan 127.6 ns

可以看到，所提供的并行算法(在三个算法中排名第一)与MSVC /CLang的固有算法一样好。

作为参考，下面是我用来测试所有函数的速度/时间/正确性的完整代码。

作为奖励，这段代码(不像上面的短代码片段)也测试128位大小，但只在CLang/GCC下(不是MSVC)，因为它们有unsigned __int128。

在网上试试!

#include <type_traits>
#include <cstdint>

using std::size_t;

#if defined(_MSC_VER) && !defined(__clang__)
    #define IS_MSVC 1
#else
    #define IS_MSVC 0
#endif

#if IS_MSVC
    #define HAS128 false
#else
    using int128_t = __int128;
    using uint128_t = unsigned __int128;
    #define HAS128 true
#endif

template <typename T> struct UnSignedT { using type = std::make_unsigned_t<T>; };
#if HAS128
    template <> struct UnSignedT<int128_t> { using type = uint128_t; };
    template <> struct UnSignedT<uint128_t> { using type = uint128_t; };
#endif
template <typename T> using UnSigned = typename UnSignedT<T>::type;

template <typename IntT>
inline size_t PopCntParallel(IntT n) {
    // https://graphics.stanford.edu/~seander/bithacks.html#CountBitsSetParallel
    using T = UnSigned<IntT>;

    T v = T(n);
    v = v - ((v >> 1) & (T)~(T)0/3);                           // temp
    v = (v & (T)~(T)0/15*3) + ((v >> 2) & (T)~(T)0/15*3);      // temp
    v = (v + (v >> 4)) & (T)~(T)0/255*15;                      // temp
    return size_t((T)(v * ((T)~(T)0/255)) >> (sizeof(T) - 1) * 8); // count
}

template <typename IntT>
inline size_t PopCntKernighan(IntT n) {
    // http://graphics.stanford.edu/~seander/bithacks.html#CountBitsSetKernighan
    using T = UnSigned<IntT>;
    T v = T(n);
    size_t c;
    for (c = 0; v; ++c)
        v &= v - 1; // Clear the least significant bit set
    return c;
}

#if IS_MSVC
    // https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/cpp/intrinsics/popcnt16-popcnt-popcnt64?view=msvc-160
    #include <intrin.h>
    #define popcnt16 __popcnt16
    #define popcnt32 __popcnt
    #define popcnt64 __popcnt64
#else
    // https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Other-Builtins.html
    #define popcnt16 __builtin_popcount
    #define popcnt32 __builtin_popcount
    #define popcnt64 __builtin_popcountll
#endif

#define popcnt128(x) (popcnt64(uint64_t(x)) + popcnt64(uint64_t(x >> 64)))

template <typename IntT>
inline size_t PopCntBuiltin(IntT n) {
    using T = UnSigned<IntT>;
    T v = T(n);
    if constexpr(sizeof(IntT) <= 2)
        return popcnt16(uint16_t(v));
    else if constexpr(sizeof(IntT) <= 4)
        return popcnt32(uint32_t(v));
    else if constexpr(sizeof(IntT) <= 8)
        return popcnt64(uint64_t(v));
    else if constexpr(sizeof(IntT) <= 16)
        return popcnt128(uint128_t(v));
    else
        static_assert([]{ return false; }());
}

#include <random>
#include <vector>
#include <chrono>
#include <string>
#include <iostream>
#include <iomanip>
#include <map>

inline double Time() {
    static auto const gtb = std::chrono::high_resolution_clock::now();
    return std::chrono::duration_cast<std::chrono::duration<double>>(
        std::chrono::high_resolution_clock::now() - gtb).count();
}

template <typename T, typename F>
void Test(std::string const & name, F f) {
    std::mt19937_64 rng{123};
    size_t constexpr bit_size = sizeof(T) * 8, ntests = 1 << 6, nnums = 1 << 14;
    std::vector<T> nums(nnums);
    for (size_t i = 0; i < nnums; ++i)
        nums[i] = T(rng() % ~T(0));
    static std::map<size_t, size_t> times;
    double min_time = 1000;
    for (size_t i = 0; i < ntests; ++i) {
        double timer = Time();
        size_t sum = 0;
        for (size_t j = 0; j < nnums; j += 4)
            sum += f(nums[j + 0]) + f(nums[j + 1]) + f(nums[j + 2]) + f(nums[j + 3]);
        auto volatile vsum = sum;
        min_time = std::min(min_time, (Time() - timer) / nnums);
        if (times.count(bit_size) && times.at(bit_size) != sum)
            std::cout << "Wrong bit cnt checksum!" << std::endl;
        times[bit_size] = sum;
    }
    std::cout << std::setw(2) << std::setfill('0') << bit_size
        << " bit " << name << " " << std::fixed << std::setprecision(1)
        << min_time * 1000000000 << " ns" << std::endl;
}

int main() {
    #define TEST(T) \
        Test<T>("Builtin", PopCntBuiltin<T>); \
        Test<T>("Parallel", PopCntParallel<T>); \
        Test<T>("Kernighan", PopCntKernighan<T>); \
        std::cout << std::endl;
    
    TEST(uint8_t); TEST(uint16_t); TEST(uint32_t); TEST(uint64_t);
    #if HAS128
        TEST(uint128_t);
    #endif
    
    #undef TEST
}

你可以:

while(n){
    n = n & (n-1);
    count++;
}

这背后的逻辑是n-1位从n的最右边的集合位倒出来。

如果n=6，即110，那么5是101，位从n的最右边的集合位倒出来。

因此，如果我们&这两个，我们将在每次迭代中使最右边的位为0，并且总是到下一个最右边的集位。因此，计数设置位。当每一位都被设置时，最糟糕的时间复杂度将是O(log n)。

这也可以正常工作:

int ans = 0;
while(num) {
  ans += (num & 1);
  num = num >> 1;
}    
return ans;

对于那些想要在c++ 11中为任何无符号整数类型作为consexpr函数的人(tacklelib/include/tacklelib/utility/math.hpp):

#include <stdint.h>
#include <limits>
#include <type_traits>

const constexpr uint32_t uint32_max = (std::numeric_limits<uint32_t>::max)();

namespace detail
{
    template <typename T>
    inline constexpr T _count_bits_0(const T & v)
    {
        return v - ((v >> 1) & 0x55555555);
    }

    template <typename T>
    inline constexpr T _count_bits_1(const T & v)
    {
        return (v & 0x33333333) + ((v >> 2) & 0x33333333);
    }

    template <typename T>
    inline constexpr T _count_bits_2(const T & v)
    {
        return (v + (v >> 4)) & 0x0F0F0F0F;
    }

    template <typename T>
    inline constexpr T _count_bits_3(const T & v)
    {
        return v + (v >> 8);
    }

    template <typename T>
    inline constexpr T _count_bits_4(const T & v)
    {
        return v + (v >> 16);
    }

    template <typename T>
    inline constexpr T _count_bits_5(const T & v)
    {
        return v & 0x0000003F;
    }

    template <typename T, bool greater_than_uint32>
    struct _impl
    {
        static inline constexpr T _count_bits_with_shift(const T & v)
        {
            return
                detail::_count_bits_5(
                    detail::_count_bits_4(
                        detail::_count_bits_3(
                            detail::_count_bits_2(
                                detail::_count_bits_1(
                                    detail::_count_bits_0(v)))))) + count_bits(v >> 32);
        }
    };

    template <typename T>
    struct _impl<T, false>
    {
        static inline constexpr T _count_bits_with_shift(const T & v)
        {
            return 0;
        }
    };
}

template <typename T>
inline constexpr T count_bits(const T & v)
{
    static_assert(std::is_integral<T>::value, "type T must be an integer");
    static_assert(!std::is_signed<T>::value, "type T must be not signed");

    return uint32_max >= v ?
        detail::_count_bits_5(
            detail::_count_bits_4(
                detail::_count_bits_3(
                    detail::_count_bits_2(
                        detail::_count_bits_1(
                            detail::_count_bits_0(v)))))) :
        detail::_impl<T, sizeof(uint32_t) < sizeof(v)>::_count_bits_with_shift(v);
}

谷歌测试库中的附加测试:

#include <stdlib.h>
#include <time.h>

namespace {
    template <typename T>
    inline uint32_t _test_count_bits(const T & v)
    {
        uint32_t count = 0;
        T n = v;
        while (n > 0) {
            if (n % 2) {
                count += 1;
            }
            n /= 2;
        }
        return count;
    }
}

TEST(FunctionsTest, random_count_bits_uint32_100K)
{
    srand(uint_t(time(NULL)));
    for (uint32_t i = 0; i < 100000; i++) {
        const uint32_t r = uint32_t(rand()) + (uint32_t(rand()) << 16);
        ASSERT_EQ(_test_count_bits(r), count_bits(r));
    }
}

TEST(FunctionsTest, random_count_bits_uint64_100K)
{
    srand(uint_t(time(NULL)));
    for (uint32_t i = 0; i < 100000; i++) {
        const uint64_t r = uint64_t(rand()) + (uint64_t(rand()) << 16) + (uint64_t(rand()) << 32) + (uint64_t(rand()) << 48);
        ASSERT_EQ(_test_count_bits(r), count_bits(r));
    }
}