Calculation of complement of original code and inverse code It is said in the book that the complement is the sign bit of the original code unchanged, and other changes, such as the original code 11100101 Inverse code 10011010 Complement 10011011 But why do many books actually write the inverse code of the above question as 00011010? I don't understand. Isn't that all changed? In a computer with 8-bit word length, the complement code is used, and the symbol bit occupies one bit, then - 128 is expressed as:_____ -The original code of 128 is 10000000, and its reverse code should not be 11111111. Why 011111? Is it not that the reverse code symbol bit remains unchanged, and the rest is reversed? I understand what you said above, which is the last sentence: why is there one more table number range complement? The reason is that in the complement, the true value 0 corresponds to only one code, while in the inverse code, the true value 0 corresponds to two codes. I don't quite understand why only one code corresponds to one more table number range than two codes? Sorry, please explain it to me again,

Calculation of complement of original code and inverse code It is said in the book that the complement is the sign bit of the original code unchanged, and other changes, such as the original code 11100101 Inverse code 10011010 Complement 10011011 But why do many books actually write the inverse code of the above question as 00011010? I don't understand. Isn't that all changed? In a computer with 8-bit word length, the complement code is used, and the symbol bit occupies one bit, then - 128 is expressed as:_____ -The original code of 128 is 10000000, and its reverse code should not be 11111111. Why 011111? Is it not that the reverse code symbol bit remains unchanged, and the rest is reversed? I understand what you said above, which is the last sentence: why is there one more table number range complement? The reason is that in the complement, the true value 0 corresponds to only one code, while in the inverse code, the true value 0 corresponds to two codes. I don't quite understand why only one code corresponds to one more table number range than two codes? Sorry, please explain it to me again,

Positive number: the inverse code of a positive number is the same as the original code. Negative number: the inverse code of a negative number, the sign bit is "1", and the numerical value part is reversed by bit. For example: the inverse of the sign bit value bit [+ 7] is 0 0000111 B [- 7] is 1 1111 000 B. so the landlord will take a closer look at the book again, whether 00011010 is the inverse code of + 26 or the inverse code of a negative number ---