Talk:Ternary logic: Difference between revisions
Content added Content deleted
(test case: Any hints or suggestions?) |
m (→test case: sign) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
== test case |
== test case == |
||
re: "Kudos (κῦδος) for actually thinking up a test case algorithm where ternary logic is intrinsically useful, optimises the test case algorithm and is preferable to binary logic". |
re: "Kudos (κῦδος) for actually thinking up a test case algorithm where ternary logic is intrinsically useful, optimises the test case algorithm and is preferable to binary logic". |
||
I know that calculating [[Perfect numbers]] and [[Matrix-exponentiation_operator]] in ''binary'' has some algorithmic advantages. I imagine that there is some problem would benefit from ''Ternary logic''. Any hints or suggestions? |
I know that calculating [[Perfect numbers]] and [[Matrix-exponentiation_operator]] in ''binary'' has some algorithmic advantages. I imagine that there is some problem would benefit from ''Ternary logic''. Any hints or suggestions? |
||
[[User:NevilleDNZ|NevilleDNZ]] |
[[User:NevilleDNZ|NevilleDNZ]] 07:21, 26 August 2011 (UTC) |
||
Revision as of 07:21, 26 August 2011
test case
re: "Kudos (κῦδος) for actually thinking up a test case algorithm where ternary logic is intrinsically useful, optimises the test case algorithm and is preferable to binary logic".
I know that calculating Perfect numbers and Matrix-exponentiation_operator in binary has some algorithmic advantages. I imagine that there is some problem would benefit from Ternary logic. Any hints or suggestions?
NevilleDNZ 07:21, 26 August 2011 (UTC)