return (a==b) ? a : c;

解释:

如果a==b，则两者都为真或都为假。如果两者都为真，我们已经找到了两个真布尔值，并可以返回真(通过返回a)。如果两者都为假，即使c为真，也不可能有两个真布尔值，因此我们返回假(通过返回a)。这是(a==b) ?一个部分。c呢?如果a==b为假，那么a或b中只有一个为真，所以我们找到了第一个真布尔值，剩下的唯一问题是c是否也为真，所以我们返回c作为答案。

另一个:

return a? b||c : b&&c

public static boolean atLeast(int atLeastToBeTrue, boolean...bools){
    int booleansTrue = 0;
    for(boolean tmp : bools){
        booleansTrue += tmp ? 1 : 0;
    }
    return booleansTrue >= atLeastToBeTrue;
}

你可以从varargs a.k.a boolean[]中选择至少有多少你想为真:-)

在我看来，3 / 3都是非常任意的数，函数应该适用于任意的数。为了回答这个问题，我要写一个函数来计算数组中的x是否为真，例如，

bool istrue ( int x, bool[] list)
    y = count true in list
    return y >= x

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.

供你参考，这只是一个完整加法器的执行部分。在硬件中，您可以根据不同的布尔表达式使用逻辑工作来确定最佳电路。我猜传统的异或解决方案要比海报上展示的不那么简洁的表达式花费更多的精力。