Talk:Tutorials/Advanced redstone circuits

Looks great. I'm going to tidy it up a bit. Like put how many XNOPR gates and such ares used into a table or something. Metalhannes 19:48, 26 November 2010 (CST)

Moving Combination Locks
Is it okay if I move the combination locks section to their own page? I want to add a few more examples, but I feel they would just clutter up this page. Bleachisback 19:49, 30 November 2010 (UTC)


 * See Talk:Redstone_circuits. I'm working on redoing all of the redstone circuits and mechanisms pages. I haven't gotten to rewriting this page yet, but I would say go ahead and add to it now. I'll move it around or clean it up soon. A combination lock would probably go into the "other redstone components" page once they're all organized.
 * --YEAH TOAST 20:16, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

MUX
I think a MUX diagram would be quite useful, either here or at Redstone circuits. A 2x1 MUX is easy to construct from 3 NOR gates and a single inverter.

I have a pic of one. Should I put the section in this page or at Redstone circuits? EDIT: I put it at Redstone Circuts under "Other". Please move it if there is a better location for it.

power.5000@live.com:"hey i need some help with the mux i do not understand this new compact version can i please get a tutorial or a more indepth description i understand the 4 channel 2 bit one very well just not this one"

Locks
--Maxpm 14:07, 18 December 2010 (CST)
 * The lock diagrams here seems extremely overcomplicated.
 * A more obvious distinguishment should be made between the sequence locks (called "order-sensitive") and the combination locks by making the combination lock use levers instead of buttons.
 * The sequence lock should be simplified using "RS-NOR chaining."
 * Yah, I agree that the sequence lock is too complicated. It would be a lot simpler to use AND gates than inverters and XORs, and the enter button (if used) could also just be connected with an AND gate and then to the door. I'm going to change the description of the lock to reflect this, but hopefully someone else with the time too could remake a diagram.
 * --Zrowny 02:40, 1 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Eh, screw that, I just got rid of the example altogether. I still hope someone will make a new diagram for the lock.
 * --Zrowny 02:50, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

@Gnu32: Why the section has been deleted? : For better understanding, see:. Using following program: --gu471 14:51, 01 March 2011 (UTC)

Suggestion: Rename "Computation" to "Adders"
When other computation circuits are created, create separate sections for them. DiEvAl 18:30, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

Guess what. Inverting an input as described here on the adders doesn't turn it into a subtractor. Clear up how the hell you do this. It says you can invert any of the signals, which to me means I could just not invert A (A is inverted on the adder). Or do I have to invert both? Or just B? Clear this up. - flyingcow93g


 * The easiest thing to do would be to rename A and B to B and A, respectively, not invert what is now B, set the carry in bit to 1, and ignore the carry out bit, resulting in A + (NOT B) + 1, or A - B. In two's complement, negative numbers are actually the larger numbers whose most-significant bit is 1, so X * -1 would be (NOT X) + 1, where X is a binary number.--Someone Else 37 19:36, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

Alternate Half-Adder Design
I created this half-adder when I found that the XOR gate design F includes an AND gate- the middle torch will only be on if both of the inputs are. However, this torch is completely inaccessible as an output. However, it was not hard to put another torch on the side. I also submit this because I find the existing half-adder design completely unintelligible. The schematic I have uploaded shows as many layers as possible in each frame, and none of the inputs or outputs are inverted.

This design appears to save a little space and redstone. The carry bit is shown extending to the left, so it can easilt be fed into another half-adder. This could easily be redirected upwards, instead. I chose not to include a full-adder design, mainly because MCRedstoneSim wouldn't copy the whole column.--Someone Else 37 19:36, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

Combining Demultiplexer and Logic Units
It seems that the content of those two sections are practically identical, although the circuit designs are widely varied. Could we combine those into a single section and discuss the practical benefits of each design?

--Noobaholic 24 March 2010 16:32 EST

Binary to BCD
Does anybody have a design for such a decoder? if so, please place it in the article under misc.