am i doing it wrong? !, ||, &&
this is a q taken from the if statement quizz
http://www.cprogramming.com/tutorial...z/answer2.htmlCode:3. Evaluate !(1 && !(0 || 1)). A. True B. False C. Unevaluatable
it says true, well, i answered it and its "B" false, am i doing it wrong? somebody explain how did he solve it.
You have to work from the inside out.
!(1 && !(0 || 1))
Start here. This is false because 0 OR 1 is true, and NOT inverts the answer.
So now we have:
!(1 && (0))
1 AND 0 is false, but the whole expression is true because of NOT.
then, i am right, and the quizz writer is wrong!?
cprogramming.com needs to fix this.
Read again. I screwed up at first. I hate having to check these things for people, when they should just learn operator precedence.
What does operator precedence have to do with this? It's all parentheses.
It is too clear and so it is hard to see.
A dunce once searched for fire with a lighted lantern.
Had he known what fire was,
He could have cooked his rice much sooner.
> What does operator precedence have to do with this?
Everything.
Rehash, in code.Originally Posted by rubso
Code:#include <stdio.h> #define WYSIWYG(x) #x " = %d\n", x int main () { printf ( WYSIWYG( 0 || 1 ) ); printf ( WYSIWYG( !(0 || 1) ) ); printf ( WYSIWYG( 1 && !(0 || 1) ) ); printf ( WYSIWYG( !(1 && !(0 || 1) ) ) ); return 0; } /* my output 0 || 1 = 1 !(0 || 1) = 0 1 && !(0 || 1) = 0 !(1 && !(0 || 1) ) = 1 */
7. It is easier to write an incorrect program than understand a correct one.
40. There are two ways to write error-free programs; only the third one works.*
Look at it again: !(1 && !(0 || 1)).
There is no need to know opperater precedence to figure this out. All you need to know is that you do what's in parentheses first.
It is too clear and so it is hard to see.
A dunce once searched for fire with a lighted lantern.
Had he known what fire was,
He could have cooked his rice much sooner.
You can say that because you have the benefit of knowing what to evaluate first and how. As I said, precedence has everything to do with it. The predicate of the AND does take some work for the new or confuzzled.
How do you know that parentheses go first? Don't just snap back "because", actually think why you know that. Now you'll see Citizen's point.
Quzah.
Hope is the first step on the road to disappointment.
Thank you, i got it now, 1 || 0 = 1 , 0 || 1 = 1
Which parenthasis can you do first?
!(1 && !(0 || 1)).
You can't fo the outer ones, because you haven't done the inside parenthasis, so you don't know there value. Similarly it is true that && has higher precidence than ||, but it wouldn't make a difference given this code.
What other way is there to solve this?
No offence ment to rubso. Boolien logic may take a little thought, and you need to watch out for careless mistakes. You probably missed a step somewhere along the way.
It is too clear and so it is hard to see.
A dunce once searched for fire with a lighted lantern.
Had he known what fire was,
He could have cooked his rice much sooner.
Parentheses and precedence are not the only things you have to worry about.
Boolean operators use short-circuit evaluation.
If you had
!(0 && !(0 || 1))
Then the right-hand side of the && expression would NOT be evaluated at all, regardless of how many ( ) you have there.
If you dance barefoot on the broken glass of undefined behaviour, you've got to expect the occasional cut.
If at first you don't succeed, try writing your phone number on the exam paper.
You have again missed the point. The reason you know which one to do first is because of operator precedence. Just like in math in school. They teach you what to do first. That is operator precedence! That's the whole point. That's why it has "Everything" to do with it.
Quzah.
Hope is the first step on the road to disappointment.
That's true, but it would have no impact on the reslut anyway. If there were a function call there you would be on to something, but there isn't.
@Quzah just show me an alternate logical way to interpret that code, that doesn't totally ignore the parenthesis.
It is too clear and so it is hard to see.
A dunce once searched for fire with a lighted lantern.
Had he known what fire was,
He could have cooked his rice much sooner.
