On 2004-05-04 at 19:52 PDT, Kurt Welgehausen wrote: >Change your expression from (~(a&b)) & (a|b) | (~(c&d)) & (c|d) >to ~(a&b) & (a|b) | (~(c&d) & (c|d)), and it should give the >result you're looking for.
Yep, that does it. Thanks Kurt! -Michal --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
