字面解释适用于所有主要语言:

return (a ? 1:0) + (b ? 1:0) + (c ? 1:0) >= 2;

但是我可能会让人们更容易阅读，并且扩展到三个以上——这一点似乎被许多程序员遗忘了:

boolean testBooleans(Array bools)
{
     int minTrue = ceil(bools.length * .5);
     int trueCount = 0;

     for(int i = 0; i < bools.length; i++)
     {
          if(bools[i])
          {
               trueCount++;
          }
     }
     return trueCount >= minTrue;
}

int count=0;

boolean atLeastTwo(boolean a, boolean b, boolean c) {
    if (a)
        count++;
    if (b)
        count++;
    if (c)
        count++;

    if (count>1)
        return true;
    else
        return false;
}

function atLeastTwoTrue($a, $b, $c) {

  int count = 0;
  count = (a ? count + 1 : count);
  count = (b ? count + 1 : count);
  count = (c ? count + 1 : count);
  return (count >= 2);
}

One thing I haven't seen others point out is that a standard thing to do in the "please write me some code" section of the job interview is to say "Could you improve that?" or "Are you completely happy with that" or "is that as optimized as possible?" when you say you are done. It's possible you heard "how would you improve that" as "this might be improved; how?". In this case changing the if(x) return true; else return false; idiom to just return x is an improvement - but be aware that there are times they just want to see how you react to the question. I have heard that some interviewers will insist there is a flaw in perfect code just to see how you cope with it.

这个问题的最佳答案应该是:“作为一名员工，我写出来的东西很重要，这样我的意思就能清楚地表达出来，同时又能保持绩效所需的效率。”我是这样写的:

function atLeastTwoAreTrue(a, b, c) {
    return (a && b) || (b && c) || (a && c);
}

在现实中，这个测试是如此的刻意，以至于如果您用一个简单的注释来容纳它，那么编写一个最快、最神秘的方法是完全可以接受的。但是，一般来说，在这个一行代码的世界里，我们需要更多可读的代码。: -)

这类问题可以用卡诺图来解决:

      | C | !C
------|---|----
 A  B | 1 | 1 
 A !B | 1 | 0
!A !B | 0 | 0
!A  B | 1 | 0

由此推断，第一行需要一组，第一列需要两组，得到聚基因润滑剂的最优解:

(C && (A || B)) || (A && B)  <---- first row
       ^
       |
   first column without third case