[...] You can easily found an answer in the Internet, [...]
It was only easy because of the way you titled this thread. I think the solution was generated by an "infinite monkeys" VI generator, as no human could have come up with the solution.
I think the solution was generated by an "infinite monkeys" VI generator, as no human could have come up with the solution.
Yeah, the fun of this question that it sounds simple initially, but quite complicated to implement. I will put solution under spoiler.
I will ask this question on every interview, where I involved time to time. The person who will solve it within half an hour will be hired immediately.
I found two solutions; I didn't figure them out myself. Putting them in a Spoiler tag wouldn't matter, but I'll go along. I'm convinced that deriving the logic is inconceivable and you'll never hire anyone immediately! Did you really figure it out yourself? Color me impressed!
I don't understand you "hardware guys".
Just put the NOT into a non-reentrant subVI and place it as many times as you want. Only one instance! 😄 😮
The hardware solution will be faster than the software approach and like NXG "no programming required".
I have not looked at the spoilers (yet) but I did ponder the challenge a bit in the hotel room the night before last. The truth table show that if we look at the input as a number "X" the output is "X-7". So a subtraction of "7" OR adding the (was it 2's?) 2s-compliment of seven would give results. It would require 5 half-adders that did not use an "inverter".
Did not go any farther than that before it was time to go to bed.
Back in High School the Math dept. head taught the calculus class. It included a quarter of Logic. He could not find a text he liked so...(logically) wrote his own. Anyone who has passed that course would remember "Tautology 4".