Negate input on boolean functions

[JÞB]

I would like to see an invert node option for all the boolean operators  (didn't we used to have this ?) For consistancy with the rest of the boolean operators the select primitave should have this for its select input too (And here I would argue that the tertiary operator is a boolean operator but, I know its in the comparision palette so please don't move it) .   I learned my logic a long long time ago and frequently use And not, Or not and if-then.  the extra not nodes clutter up my BD unless  I use the multiple boolean and frankly the symbol on that function is small enough that I can miss-read the mode.

[RavensFan]

What do you mean by the "tertiary operator"?  The compound arithmetic node? It can be set for OR or AND.  Set for one or more inputs, and all the inputs and the outputs can be individually selected for inverting.  I think that function is the best if you need any kind of logic that the traditional functions OR, AND, NOR, NAND, XOR, NXOR can't handle.

[elset191]

Tertiary is the C name for Select

[JÞB]

Called the tertiary operator in Text languages-  It sticks on me

[X.]

A related suggestion (to dump a lot of the logical operators): here

[SteveChandler]

I was just about to suggest this and found it doing a search. Kudos!

[elset191]

Something's been bothering me for the past two years since I first saw this idea.  It's called ternary operator, not tertiary.

[TomOrr0W]

Looking at the comments on this idea, I ended up searching invert, negate, bubble, and circle (skipping anything that was already marked duplicate).  I figured I might as well link the related ideas.

Strongly Related:

https://forums.ni.com/t5/LabVIEW-Idea-Exchange/Invert-Option-in-all-Boolean-Terminals/idi-p/1281058

https://forums.ni.com/t5/LabVIEW-Idea-Exchange/Invertable-case-selector/idi-p/2320108

Related:

https://forums.ni.com/t5/LabVIEW-Idea-Exchange/Shortcut-to-Invert-Input-Output-in-Compound-Arithmeti...

https://forums.ni.com/t5/LabVIEW-Idea-Exchange/Correct-the-quot-not-quot-symbol-by-removing-the-inve...

https://forums.ni.com/t5/LabVIEW-Idea-Exchange/Automatically-invert-compound-arithmetic-inputs-when-...

https://forums.ni.com/t5/LabVIEW-Idea-Exchange/Invert-signal-going-into-a-select-VI/idi-p/2224232

https://forums.ni.com/t5/LabVIEW-Idea-Exchange/General-Comparison-Operator-as-an-Express-VI/idi-p/12...

https://forums.ni.com/t5/LabVIEW-Idea-Exchange/Simplifying-Boolean-expressions/idi-p/1890963

https://forums.ni.com/t5/LabVIEW-Idea-Exchange/Negate-option-on-Comparison-functions/idc-p/3793254

https://forums.ni.com/t5/LabVIEW-Idea-Exchange/Offer-a-Positive-Logic-Alternative/idi-p/1022834

https://forums.ni.com/t5/LabVIEW-Idea-Exchange/Array-String-not-empty-function/idi-p/3163821

A couple people (not in this idea) mentioned making inversion bubbles more visible:

https://forums.ni.com/t5/LabVIEW-Idea-Exchange/Enlarge-the-Invert-Circles/idi-p/1023748

https://forums.ni.com/t5/LabVIEW-Idea-Exchange/Replace-the-Invert-Circles-in-Compound-Arithmetic-Nod...

https://forums.ni.com/t5/LabVIEW-Idea-Exchange/Compound-Arithmetic-with-inverted-input-should-be-eas...

[Darren]

Duplicate of https://forums.ni.com/t5/LabVIEW-Idea-Exchange/Invert-Option-in-all-Boolean-Terminals/idi-p/1281058

[JÞB]

---

@JÞB wrote:
I would like to see an invert node option for all the boolean operators  (didn't we used to have this ?) For consistancy with the rest of the boolean operators the select primitave should have this for its select input too (And here I would argue that the tertiary operator is a boolean operator but, I know its in the comparision palette so please don't move it) .   I learned my logic a long long time ago and frequently use And not, Or not and if-then.  the extra not nodes clutter up my BD unless  I use the multiple boolean and frankly the symbol on that function is small enough that I can miss-read the mode.

---

Check the post dates Darren! I was 7 mos ahead 

[Darren]

> Check the post dates Darren! I was 7 mos ahead 

I know. We don't have a way to merge ideas. Given that, we've decided that the best way to ensure visibility for highly-kudoed duplicate ideas is to leave open the one with more kudos. It's *usually* the one that's older, but in this case, it's not.