|WikiProject Electronics||(Rated Start-class)|
where does the word "barrel" come from in the name or what does it mean?
As in the barrel of a gun. When it rotates, it takes all of the bits a particular distance at once.
This is in contrast to earlier register-based single shifting mechanisms based on chains of flip flops.
The calculation is incorrect: It should be simply log2 n. This assumes (for simplicity) that each of the multiplexers are n bits wide. The first stage shift's across 1 bit line, the next 2 lines, 4, 8, and so on. An interesting side-effect of this arrangement is that the shift number is specified directly in binary notation, without the need for a decoder of any sort. — Preceding unsigned comment added by REH2 (talk • contribs) 14:52, 23 February 2011 (UTC)
like at http://www-comm.cs.shinshu-u.ac.jp/public/comparch/node45.html or http://www.realworldtech.com/page.cfm?ArticleID=RWT081502231107&p=3 `a5b (talk) 21:17, 5 July 2011 (UTC)
- here www.lirmm.fr/arith18/papers/hilewitz-PerformingBitManipulations.pdf at page 9 are pictured two types of barell shifters: classic one and log shifter. `a5b (talk) 21:35, 5 July 2011 (UTC)
|It is requested that a diagram or diagrams be included in this article to improve its quality. Specific illustrations, plots or diagrams can be requested at the Graphic Lab.
For more information, refer to discussion on this page and/or the listing at Wikipedia:Requested images.
Is there any consensus on the inventor of the barrel-style shifter, or on the first processor to implement it? I recall that Seymour Cray used one in the CDC 6600 ca. 1963-4. Some casual Internet searching suggests that Burroughs may also have a claim, possibly with its B5000. (Note that I'm not talking about the CDC 6600's I/O system, which has been described using the similar-but-unrelated term “barrel and slot”.) 22.214.171.124 (talk) 01:54, 13 April 2014 (UTC)
Diagram does not match text
Diagram shows 4-bit barrel shifter with 16 multiplixers. Cost section says number of multiplexers required for 4 bits is 4*log2(4) = 4*2 = 8. 8 is not 16. Which of these is incorrect: The diagram, or the cost section? If neither, then what additional information is missing from this article? --126.96.36.199 (talk) 16:39, 26 April 2015 (UTC)