### Re^6: Faster Luhn Check Digit Calculation?

by BrowserUk (Patriarch)
 on Dec 01, 2018 at 20:19 UTC ( #1226602=note: print w/replies, xml ) Need Help??

in reply to Re^5: Faster Luhn Check Digit Calculation?
in thread Faster Luhn Check Digit Calculation?

Unrolling the loop and using Anonymonk's lookup trick extracts another 5%:

```int l[] = { 0, 2, 4, 6, 8, 1, 3, 5, 7, 9 };
int c_luhn2( char *s ) {
int total = 0;

total += l[ s[ 0] - '0' ];
total +=    s[ 1] - '0';
total += l[ s[ 2] - '0' ];
total +=    s[ 3] - '0';
total += l[ s[ 4] - '0' ];
total +=    s[ 5] - '0';
total += l[ s[ 6] - '0' ];
total +=    s[ 7] - '0';
total += l[ s[ 8] - '0' ];
total +=    s[ 9] - '0';
total += l[ s[10] - '0' ];
total +=    s[11] - '0';
total += l[ s[12] - '0' ];
total +=    s[13] - '0';
total += l[ s[14] - '0' ];

total *= 9;
}

I doubt there is much fat left in there :)

With the rise and rise of 'Social' network sites: 'Computers are making people easier to use everyday'
Examine what is said, not who speaks -- Silence betokens consent -- Love the truth but pardon error.
"Science is about questioning the status quo. Questioning authority". The enemy of (IT) success is complexity.
In the absence of evidence, opinion is indistinguishable from prejudice. Suck that fhit

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^7: Faster Luhn Check Digit Calculation?
by tybalt89 (Prior) on Dec 02, 2018 at 05:16 UTC

Looks fat to me ( just kidding :)

Is this any faster? Or does the compiler optimize away the differences?

```int l[] = {
0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0,
0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0,
0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0,
0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0,
0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0,
0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0,
0, 2, 4, 6, 8, 1, 3, 5, 7, 9 };

int
c_luhn2( char *s ) {
return ((
l[ (int)s[ 0] ]
+    s[ 1]
+ l[ (int)s[ 2] ]
+    s[ 3]
+ l[ (int)s[ 4] ]
+    s[ 5]
+ l[ (int)s[ 6] ]
+    s[ 7]
+ l[ (int)s[ 8] ]
+    s[ 9]
+ l[ (int)s[10] ]
+    s[11]
+ l[ (int)s[12] ]
+    s[13]
+ l[ (int)s[14] ] - 7 * '0' ) * 9) % 10;
}

The optomiser eliminates any differences. Yours (c_luhn3 below) can be slightly faster one run and slightly slower on the next; but the difference is less that 0.5% either way:

```#! perl -slw
use strict;
use Inline C => Config => BUILD_NOISY => 1;
use Inline C => <<'END_C',  NAME => '_luhn', CLEAN_AFTER_BUILD =>0;

int c_luhn( char *s ) {
int i, total = 0;

for( i=0; i < 15; ++i ) {
int d = s[ i ] - '0';
if( !( i  & 1 ) ) {
d *= 2;
if( d > 9 ) d -= 9;
}
total += d;
}
total *= 9;
}

int l[] = { 0, 2, 4, 6, 8, 1, 3, 5, 7, 9 };
int c_luhn2( char *s ) {
int total = 0;

total += l[ s[ 0] - '0' ];
total +=    s[ 1] - '0';
total += l[ s[ 2] - '0' ];
total +=    s[ 3] - '0';
total += l[ s[ 4] - '0' ];
total +=    s[ 5] - '0';
total += l[ s[ 6] - '0' ];
total +=    s[ 7] - '0';
total += l[ s[ 8] - '0' ];
total +=    s[ 9] - '0';
total += l[ s[10] - '0' ];
total +=    s[11] - '0';
total += l[ s[12] - '0' ];
total +=    s[13] - '0';
total += l[ s[14] - '0' ];

total *= 9;
}

int ll[] = {
0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0,
0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0,
0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0,
0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0,
0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0,
0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0,
0, 2, 4, 6, 8, 1, 3, 5, 7, 9 };

int
c_luhn3( char *s ) {
return ((
ll[ (int)s[ 0] ]
+    s[ 1]
+ ll[ (int)s[ 2] ]
+    s[ 3]
+ ll[ (int)s[ 4] ]
+    s[ 5]
+ ll[ (int)s[ 6] ]
+    s[ 7]
+ ll[ (int)s[ 8] ]
+    s[ 9]
+ ll[ (int)s[10] ]
+    s[11]
+ ll[ (int)s[12] ]
+    s[13]
+ ll[ (int)s[14] ] - 7 * '0' ) * 9) % 10;
}

END_C
use Time::HiRes qw[ time ];

my @samples = qw[
4011350000000008
4011350000000016
4011350000000024
4011350000000032
4011350000000040
4011350000000057
4011350000000065
4011350000000073
4011350000000081
4011350000000099
];

sub luhn {
use integer;
my \$s = \$_[ 0 ];
my \$total = 0;
for my \$i ( 0 .. 14 ) {
my \$d = substr( \$s, \$i, 1 );
unless( \$i & 1 ) {
\$d *= 2;
\$d -= 9 if \$d > 9;
}
\$total += \$d;
}
\$total *= 9;
return chop \$total;
}

for ( @samples ) {
print "\$_: ", luhn( substr \$_, 0, 15 );
}

my \$start = time;
#for ( 401135000000000..401135000999999 ) {
#    my \$chk = luhn( \$_ );
#}
#printf "Took %.9f seconds.\n", time() - \$start;

#for ( @samples ) {
#    print "\$_: ", c_luhn( \$_ );
#}

\$start = time;
for ( 401135000000000..401135000999999 ) {
my \$chk = c_luhn( \$_ );
}
printf "Took %.9f seconds.\n", time() - \$start;

for ( @samples ) {
print "\$_: ", c_luhn2( \$_ );
}

\$start = time;
for ( 401135000000000..401135000999999 ) {
my \$chk = c_luhn2( \$_ );
}
printf "Took %.9f seconds.\n", time() - \$start;

for ( @samples ) {
print "\$_: ", c_luhn3( \$_ );
}

\$start = time;
for ( 401135000000000..401135000999999 ) {
my \$chk = c_luhn3( \$_ );
}
printf "Took %.9f seconds.\n", time() - \$start;
```C:\test>luhn
4011350000000008: 8
4011350000000016: 6
4011350000000024: 4
4011350000000032: 2
4011350000000040: 0
4011350000000057: 7
4011350000000065: 5
4011350000000073: 3
4011350000000081: 1
4011350000000099: 9
Took 0.751899958 seconds.
4011350000000008: 8
4011350000000016: 6
4011350000000024: 4
4011350000000032: 2
4011350000000040: 0
4011350000000057: 7
4011350000000065: 5
4011350000000073: 3
4011350000000081: 1
4011350000000099: 9
Took 0.695394039 seconds.
4011350000000008: 8
4011350000000016: 6
4011350000000024: 4
4011350000000032: 2
4011350000000040: 0
4011350000000057: 7
4011350000000065: 5
4011350000000073: 3
4011350000000081: 1
4011350000000099: 9
Took 0.693738222 seconds.

C:\test>luhn
4011350000000008: 8
4011350000000016: 6
4011350000000024: 4
4011350000000032: 2
4011350000000040: 0
4011350000000057: 7
4011350000000065: 5
4011350000000073: 3
4011350000000081: 1
4011350000000099: 9
Took 0.751657963 seconds.
4011350000000008: 8
4011350000000016: 6
4011350000000024: 4
4011350000000032: 2
4011350000000040: 0
4011350000000057: 7
4011350000000065: 5
4011350000000073: 3
4011350000000081: 1
4011350000000099: 9
Took 0.694734097 seconds.
4011350000000008: 8
4011350000000016: 6
4011350000000024: 4
4011350000000032: 2
4011350000000040: 0
4011350000000057: 7
4011350000000065: 5
4011350000000073: 3
4011350000000081: 1
4011350000000099: 9
Took 0.697062969 seconds.

With the rise and rise of 'Social' network sites: 'Computers are making people easier to use everyday'
Examine what is said, not who speaks -- Silence betokens consent -- Love the truth but pardon error.
"Science is about questioning the status quo. Questioning authority". The enemy of (IT) success is complexity.
In the absence of evidence, opinion is indistinguishable from prejudice. Suck that fhit

At least according to godbolt.org, the three routines don't get folded into the same assembly code. What's (somewhat) interesting is that gcc and clang create different addressing modes for the accesses, so it might be worth to switch between compilers and compiler versions if calculating the check digits was material to the program operation.

Update:Ignore this! It doesn't stand up to syphilis's scrutiny. (It only works for the OPs limited test range by luck!)

Looks fat to me ( just kidding :)

If its skinny you want, try this for (its lack of) size :)

Correct results and 35% faster to boot:

```int lookup[] = { 8, 6, 4, 2, 0, 7, 5, 3, 1, 9, 7, 5, 3, 1, 9, 6, 4, 2,
+ 0 };
int c_fluhn( int n ) {
return lookup[ n % 20 ];
}

With the rise and rise of 'Social' network sites: 'Computers are making people easier to use everyday'
Examine what is said, not who speaks -- Silence betokens consent -- Love the truth but pardon error.
"Science is about questioning the status quo. Questioning authority". The enemy of (IT) success is complexity.
In the absence of evidence, opinion is indistinguishable from prejudice. Suck that fhit
Very nice. Unfortunately, Algorithm::LUHN supports some odd inputs, like non-numeric strings (See their docs).

Create A New User
Domain Nodelet?
Node Status?
node history
Node Type: note [id://1226602]
help
Chatterbox?
and the web crawler heard nothing...

How do I use this? | Other CB clients
Other Users?
Others browsing the Monastery: (4)
As of 2022-01-20 00:06 GMT
Sections?
Information?
Find Nodes?
Leftovers?
Voting Booth?
In 2022, my preferred method to securely store passwords is:

Results (56 votes). Check out past polls.

Notices?