Sujet : Re: De Morgan's laws
De : janis_papanagnou+ng (at) *nospam* hotmail.com (Janis Papanagnou)
Groupes : comp.unix.shellDate : 28. Dec 2024, 19:12:08
Autres entêtes
Organisation : A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID : <vkpf1p$f02q$1@dont-email.me>
References : 1 2 3 4 5
User-Agent : Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.8.0
On 28.12.2024 18:35, Salvador Mirzo wrote:
gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) writes:
In article <vknmc3$3v5eh$2@dont-email.me>,
Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
On Fri, 27 Dec 2024 22:37:26 -0000 (UTC), Christian Weisgerber wrote:
>
You can also de-morgan the expression
>
First time I heard a reference to De Morgans theorems being used as a
verb. ;)
>
Does make it sound like you are removing something called morgan though,
doesnt it ...
>
I think the word we're looking for here is: un-de-morgan.
>
That is, to translate the verbose but more understandable:
>
!foo and !bar
>
into:
>
! (foo or bar)
>
via application of De Morgan's law(s) would be to de-morgan it.
>
CW was suggesting the reverse operation.
I'd suggest that to write
!(foo or bar)
is /to de-morgan/ the expression ``!foo and !bar'', while to rewrite
back as !(foo or bar) is /to morgan/ the expression.
I've ever always seen both directions as transformations according
to the laws of De Morgan (so neither would be en-morgan or de-morgan,
sort of).
In context of 'find' the '-and' form might be considered simpler due
to 'find's inherent 'and'-logic.
Janis