3 ms·
I've never heard of saturation arithmetic and now it all makes sense. Otherwise I thought it was more common to think of XOR as boolean addition, and OR would b
by threatofrain 3y ago
I've never heard of saturation arithmetic and now it all makes sense. Otherwise I thought it was more common to think of XOR as boolean addition, and OR would be represented as xy + x + y.
- layer8 3y agoYes, true and false with AND and XOR form a mathematical ring [0]. Still, OR is also an additive operation. IMO one could give OR and XOR the same precedence. On the other hand, there is no strict need to have a dedicated boolean XOR operator, as it works the same as = (equals). [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ring_(mathematics) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ring_(mathematics)
- orlp 3y agoMore than just a ring, it is the simplest finite field.
- o11c 3y agoSaturation is actually the wrong way to think about bools when other operations get involved: saturate(0 - 1) = 0 bool(0 - 1) = 1
- dataflow 3y agoFun (but not particularly useful fact) is you can also represent x OR y as 1 - (1 - x)(1 - y). This shouldn't be too weird since x OR y is equal to NOT ((NOT x) AND (NOT y)).