Though the accepted answer points out that endianess is a concept from the memory view. But I don't think that answer the question directly.
Some answers tell me that bitwise operations don't depend on endianess, and the processor may represent the bytes in any other way. Anyway, it's talking about that endianess gets abstracted.
But when we do some bitwise calculations on the paper for example, don't need to state the endianess in the first place? Most times we choose an endianess implicitly.
For example, assume we have a line of code like this
0x1F & 0xEF
How would you calculate the result by hand, on a paper?
MSB 0001 1111 LSB
1110 1111
result: 0000 1111
So here we use a Big Endian format to do the calculation. You can also use Little Endian to calculate and get the same result.
Btw, when we write numbers in code, I think it's like a Big Endian format. 123456
or 0x1F
, most significant numbers starts from the left.
Again, as soon as we write some a binary format of a value on the paper, I think we've already chosen an Endianess and we are viewing the value as we see it from the memory.
So back to the question, an shift operation <<
should be thought as shifting from LSB(least significant byte) to MSB(most significant byte).
Then as for the example in the question:
numb=1025
Little Endian
LSB 00000001 00000100 00000000 00000000 MSB
So << 10
would be 10bit
shifting from LSB to MSB.
Comparison and << 10
operations for Little Endian format step by step:
MSB LSB
00000000 00000000 00000100 00000001 numb(1025)
00000000 00010000 00000100 00000000 << 10
LSB MSB
00000000 00000100 00010000 00000000 numb(1025) << 10, and put in a Little Endian Format
LSB MSB
00000001 00000100 00000000 00000000 numb(1205) in Little Endian format
00000010 00001000 00000000 00000000 << 1
00000100 00010000 00000000 00000000 << 2
00001000 00100000 00000000 00000000 << 3
00010000 01000000 00000000 00000000 << 4
00100000 10000000 00000000 00000000 << 5
01000000 00000000 00000001 00000000 << 6
10000000 00000000 00000010 00000000 << 7
00000000 00000001 00000100 00000000 << 8
00000000 00000010 00001000 00000000 << 9
00000000 00000100 00010000 00000000 << 10 (check this final result!)
Wow! I get the expected result as the OP described!
The problems that the OP didn't get the expected result are that:
It seems that he didn't shift from LSB to MSB.
When shifting bits in Little Endian format, you should realize(thank god I realize it) that:
LSB 10000000 00000000 MSB << 1
is
LSB 00000000 00000001 MSB
, not
LSB 01000000 00000000 MSB
Because for each individual 8bits
, we are actually writing it in a MSB 00000000 LSB
Big Endian format.
So it's like
LSB[ (MSB 10000000 LSB) (MSB 00000000 LSB) ]MSB
To sum up:
Though bitwise operations is said to be abstracted away blablablabla..., when we calculate bitwise operations by hand, we still need to know what endianess we are using as we write down the binary format on the paper. Also we need to make sure all the operators use the same endianess.
The OP didn't get the expected result is because he did the shifting wrong.