In propositional logic and Boolean algebra, De Morgan's laws are a pair of transformation rules that are both valid rules of inference. They are named after Augustus De Morgan, a 19th-century British mathematician. The rules allow the expression of conjunctions and disjunctions purely in terms of each other via negation.
Another useless post... edification and education - vicarious embarrassment
I can write an article about having all the code in one line, but the question (my question) is still valid: why ?
Or even better: you know when at the beginning you invert the false and the true, so later on the QA and debugging - your colleague will have a brain f..k, but again - why ?
P.S You don't have to answer, in any case it will be another excuse
I believe he is referring to boolean algebraic notation when he says it makes things more readable.
In propositional logic and Boolean algebra, De Morgan's laws are a pair of transformation rules that are both valid rules of inference. They are named after Augustus De Morgan, a 19th-century British mathematician. The rules allow the expression of conjunctions and disjunctions purely in terms of each other via negation.
I think you're missing the point of the article Ceban. It wasn't meant to upset you.
Another useless post... edification and education - vicarious embarrassment
I can write an article about having all the code in one line, but the question (my question) is still valid: why ?
Or even better: you know when at the beginning you invert the false and the true, so later on the QA and debugging - your colleague will have a brain f..k, but again - why ?
P.S You don't have to answer, in any case it will be another excuse
Oh no, please keep commenting; it just keeps boosting my useless post's stats! How else can I maximize this vicarious embarrassment?...
Dev.to Writing: Reactions
Nathan Kallman ・ Sep 29 '20 ・ 1 min read