[yellowapple]

So I'm a bit confused with how this is measuring the number of NANDs; for example, with the first adder problem, I solved it with exactly two gates, neither of which were NAND, and yet while it's recognized as the lowest number of gates, it insists that it can be done with fewer NANDs (than zero, apparently). Is it counting the NANDs that may or may not be used to implement those two gates? And if so, is that based on how I solved the previous problems? Or is it based on the lowest possible number of NANDs that would be required to solve those problems / produce those gates?

If it is indeed counting the NANDs used to make the gates I actually used, it'd be useful to have a clear indication of exactly how many NANDs each gate uses so I can chase after a game of NAND Golf.

In any case, this is fun :)

[noncoml]

> If it is indeed counting the NANDs used to make the gates I actually used

This

> it'd be useful to have a clear indication of exactly how many NANDs each gate uses

You learned that as part of your first section exercises.

At the end of the day everything is made of NAND gates. That’s what the first section teaches you.

[Turing_Machine]

It would be nice if that information were available in later stages, without having to take notes.

I'd like to see the ability to "unbundle" the composite components. Maybe an intermediate pin in (say) the XOR or half-adder has exactly the signal you need to save a component in a later stage.

[sergex]

> I'd like to see the ability to "unbundle" the composite components.

This is a great idea, and you are not the first to suggest it. I just haven't gotten around to implement it.