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?


当前回答

这真的取决于你对“改进”的定义:

清晰吗?

boolean twoOrMoreAreTrue(boolean a, boolean b, boolean c)
{
    return (a && b) || (a && c) || (b && c);
}

反之亦然?

boolean moreThanTwo(boolean a, boolean b, boolean c)
{
    return a == b ? a : c;
}

更一般的?

boolean moreThanXTrue(int x, boolean[] bs)
{
    int count = 0;

    for(boolean b : bs)
    {
        count += b ? 1 : 0;

        if(count > x) return true;
    }

    return false;
}

更多的可伸缩的吗?

boolean moreThanXTrue(int x, boolean[] bs)
{
    int count = 0;

    for(int i < 0; i < bs.length; i++)
    {
        count += bs[i] ? 1 : 0;

        if(count > x) return true;

        int needed = x - count;
        int remaining = bs.length - i;

        if(needed >= remaining) return false;
    }

    return false;
}

更快呢?

// Only profiling can answer this.

哪一种是“改进”的,很大程度上取决于具体情况。

其他回答

最简单的方式(IMO),不容易混淆,容易阅读:

// Three booleans, check if two or more are true

return ( a && ( b || c ) ) || ( b && c );

在c#中,我首先想到的是:

public bool lol(int minTrue, params bool[] bools)
{
    return bools.Count( ( b ) => b ) >= minTrue;
}

应该很快。

调用应该是这样的:

lol( 2, true, true, false );

这样,您就将规则(两个必须为真)留给调用者,而不是将它们嵌入到方法中。

而不是写:

if (someExpression) {
    return true;
} else {
    return false;
}

写:

return someExpression;

至于表达式本身,是这样的:

boolean atLeastTwo(boolean a, boolean b, boolean c) {
    return a ? (b || c) : (b && c);
}

或者这个(你觉得哪个更容易理解):

boolean atLeastTwo(boolean a, boolean b, boolean c) {
    return a && (b || c) || (b && c);
}

它只测试a和b一次,c最多测试一次。

参考文献

JLS 15.25条件运算符?:

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)。

我不喜欢三元(return a ?(b || c):(b && c);从最上面的答案),我想我没有看到任何人提到过它。它是这样写的:

boolean atLeastTwo(boolean a, boolean b, boolean c) {
    if (a) {
        return b||c;
    } 
    else {
        return b&&C;
    }