this post was submitted on 27 Oct 2023
1093 points (99.2% liked)

Programmer Humor

32410 readers
344 users here now

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

Rules:

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 
all 23 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 46 points 1 year ago

Ah, so that's why your house gets egged even if you give candy.

[–] [email protected] 44 points 1 year ago (2 children)

What about trick implies treat?

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Implies sign is an arrow, what do you mean?

[–] [email protected] 26 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I think they refer to the truth table of Implies.

A | B | A => B
T   T      T
T   F      F
F   T      T
F   F      T
[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago

Yes, they do.

[–] [email protected] 43 points 1 year ago (1 children)

So since you're expecting to get either tricked or treated, the correct way to say it is "trick XOR treat"

[–] [email protected] 18 points 1 year ago

You mean we are not supposed to trick after getting candy? That ruins the fun!

[–] [email protected] 28 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 1 points 11 months ago

I'm partial to Trick NOR Treat

[–] [email protected] 14 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 13 points 1 year ago

Trick or treat is Turing complete

[–] [email protected] 12 points 1 year ago

Tiis give me flashbacks of my probability classes of me doing little diagrams to help me visualize what set in probability space im looking for.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Me, fresh out of COMP301, bragging about how I can make any halloween costume out of only xor gates

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

You mean NAND gates?

(Trick NAND Trick) NAND (Treat NAND Treat) <-> Trick or Treat

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 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

[–] [email protected] 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

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

pretty sure I meant to say nor

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I believe in XNOR (neither or) supremacy

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

What about 1/2 Trick + 1/2 Treat until you observe