In article <5337b4e4$0$29994$c3e8da3$54964...@news.astraweb.com>, Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.pyt...@pearwood.info> wrote:
> I think Johannes got it right: boolean logic is easier to reason about > when there is a minimum of "not"s. I used to do a lot of digital logic design. In certain logic families, it's easier to build a NAND gate than an AND gate (and similarly, NOR is easier than OR). This leads to lots of inverted logic. Adding to the confusion, many designs would use "active low" logic, which means a 1 was represented by a low voltage, and a 0 by a high voltage. So, you quickly end up with gibberish like, "not active low clear nand not active low enable clock". I'm glad I don't do that stuff any more. -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
