一位面试官最近问了我这样一个问题:给定三个布尔变量a、b和c,如果三个变量中至少有两个为真,则返回true。
我的解决方案如下:
boolean atLeastTwo(boolean a, boolean b, boolean c) {
if ((a && b) || (b && c) || (a && c)) {
return true;
}
else{
return false;
}
}
他说这还可以进一步改进,但如何改进呢?
作为@TofuBeer TofuBeer精彩帖子的补充,考虑@pdox pdox的回答:
static boolean five(final boolean a, final boolean b, final boolean c)
{
return a == b ? a : c;
}
再考虑一下它的分解版本,如"javap -c"所给出的:
static boolean five(boolean, boolean, boolean);
Code:
0: iload_0
1: iload_1
2: if_icmpne 9
5: iload_0
6: goto 10
9: iload_2
10: ireturn
Pdox的答案编译成的字节代码比之前的任何答案都要少。它的执行时间与其他的相比如何?
one 5242 ms
two 6318 ms
three (moonshadow) 3806 ms
four 7192 ms
five (pdox) 3650 ms
至少在我的电脑上,pdox的回答比@moonshadow moonshadow的回答稍微快一点,使得pdox的回答是最快的(在我的惠普/英特尔笔记本电脑上)。
If the goal is to return a bitwise two-out-of-three value for three operands, arithmetic and iterative approaches are apt to be relatively ineffective. On many CPU architectures, a good form would be "return ((a | b) & c) | (a & b);". That takes four boolean operations. On single-accumulator machines (common in small embedded systems) that's apt to take a total of seven instructions per byte. The form "return (a & b) | (a & c) | (b & c);" is perhaps nicer looking, but it would require five boolean operations, or nine instructions per byte on a single-accumulator machine.
顺便提一下,在CMOS逻辑中,计算“不是三选二”需要12个晶体管(相比之下,逆变器需要2个晶体管,双输入NAND或NOR需要4个晶体管,而三输入NAND或NOR需要6个晶体管)。