this post was submitted on 27 Oct 2023
1136 points (99.2% liked)

Programmer Humor

32461 readers
797 users here now

Post funny things about programming here! (Or just rant about your favourite programming language.)

Rules:

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] AntiOutsideAktion@hexbear.net 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] walthervonstolzing@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 year ago (2 children)

NAND and XOR aren't equivalent, though

| X | Y | X NAND Y |
| 0 | 0 | 1        |
| 1 | 0 | 1        |
| 0 | 1 | 1        |
| 1 | 1 | 0        |
| X | Y | X XOR Y |
| 0 | 0 | 0       |
| 1 | 0 | 1       |
| 0 | 1 | 1       |
| 1 | 1 | 0       |

& XOR can be reduced to NAND; not sure if NAND can be reduced to XOR

[–] myslsl@mastodon.social 2 points 1 year ago

@walthervonstolzing @AntiOutsideAktion

If ya'll get bored and wanna read more about this, this is a property called functional completeness. I'm pretty sure nand and nor are the only functionally complete binary operators, so xor shouldn't be functionally complete.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Functional_completeness

[–] AntiOutsideAktion@hexbear.net 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

pretty sure I meant to say nor