The Hilbert curve is a fractal space-filling curve that is rather pretty to look at. [!hilbert.png](http://mathworld.wolfram.com/HilbertCurve.html) A Hilbert curve of order n traces a single path over a square of side 2^n units, as you can see in the images from MathWorld above (with curves of order 2 through 6). If you pick a point p from within the square covered by a curve, and trace out the curve until you reach that point, the number of intermediate points that you passed through along your way to p is called the Hilbert distance. The notion of distance along a space-filling curve is useful for a few reasons.

  • You can use it as a hash from a 2D coordinate to an integer.

  • Some curves preserve locality; for example, points that are nearby in 2D space are likely to have similar Hilbert distances.

  • It’s an isomorphism: you can turn a distance back into a 2D coordinate, in some cases quite easily.

  • Locality-preserving hashes can be useful for clustering nodes of an R-tree, which is the generalisation of a B-tree to spatial data. There’s a nice algorithm for computing the Hilbert distance of a 2D point that’s linear in the order of the curve (or logarithmic in the size of the side of the square you’re trying to cover). To put this into useful terms, a “10 megapixel” camera typically has a resolution of 3766×2800 pixels. To cover every pixel with a Hilbert curve, you’d need a curve with 4096 points on a side, which is an order-12 curve. You can compute the Hilbert distance of any point in your 10-megapixel photo with 12 steps of the distance algorithm. Here’s an implementation of this Hilbert distance algorithm in Haskell.

    import Data.Bits

    hilbertDistance :: (Bits a, Ord a) => Int -> (a,a) -> a

    hilbertDistance d (x,y)

    | x < 0 || x >= 1 `shiftL` d = error "x bounds"

| y < 0 || y >= 1 `shiftL` d = error "y bounds"

| otherwise = dist (1 `shiftL` (d - 1)) (1 `shiftL` ((d - 1) * 2)) 0 x y

where dist 0 _ result _ _ = result

      dist side area result x y =

          case (compare x side, compare y side) of

          (LT, LT) -> step result y x

          (LT, _)  -> step (result + area) x (y - side)

          (_, LT)  -> step (result + area * 3) (side - y - 1)

                      (side * 2 - x - 1)

          (_, _)   -> step (result + area * 2) (x - side) (y - side)

          where step = dist (side `shiftR` 1) (area `shiftR` 2) As you can see, each step requires a few comparisons, a few shifts, and a handful of arithmetic operations, so it's fairly cheap, and the loop unrolls and constant-folds well. There's some controversy in the literature over whether a Hilbert curve gives better spatial locality than a Lebesgue (also known as a Z-order, or Morton) curve. It's certainly the case that computing the Lebesgue distance is much cheaper than the Hilbert distance, as it's possible to finagle an answer using a fixed, unconditional sequence of

bit-twiddling operations to interleave the bits of the x coordinate with those of the y.

lebesgueDistance :: (Int, Int) -> Int

lebesgueDistance (x,y) =

    let ms = [(0x00FF00FF, 8), (0x0F0F0F0F, 4),

              (0x33333333, 2), (0x55555555, 1)]

        aaargh x (mask,shift) = (x .|. (x `shiftL` shift)) .&. mask

        x' = foldl aaargh x ms

        y' = foldl aaargh y ms

    in x .|. (y `shiftL` 1) I haven't myself checked to see which curve better preserves locality. It's certainly easier to see how to extend the Lebesgue bit-fiddling hack to a higher dimension, while the given Hilbert code is a bit of a head wrecker.