Calculator Input 12

[civeng80]

My old canon calculator I've had for 21 years finally gave up the ghost.

Ive been trying my son's canon calculator but dont like the input method, e.g. sin, cos, square root before number input i.e. operation done as you would write it on paper. They all seem to be like this nowadays.
I think the older calculators used reverse algebraic input, but they dont seem to have them anymore. I know Hp have RPN but dont want to get HP anymore prefer casio or canon.

Anyone have any suggestions ?

 

[IRstuff]

"On my 50g:"

OK, I won't argue against YOUR HP calculator doing that, but models 35, 45, 25, 41, 34, 11, 12, 15, do not; they all have four register stacks.

TTFN
I can do absolutely anything. I'm an expert!
homework forum: //

http://www.engineering.com/AskForum/aff/32.aspx

faq731-376 forum1529

 

[transmissiontowers]

I learned engineering on a slide rule in 1967 before calculators. My first work calculator was a HP45 and several others over the years. I'm still using a HP41 and got used to RPN since the beginning and have trouble with an algebraic calculator. I keep a slide rule in my desk just incase the big EMP comes and wipes out my HP Z800 WS with 12 cores and my HP41.

_____________________________________
I have been called "A storehouse of worthless information" many times.

 

[BUGGAR]

Circular slide rules are best because you don't have to back up when dividing.

 

[IRstuff]

@transmissiontowers

Maybe you should kept a spare calculator wrapped in aluminum foil ;-)

TTFN
I can do absolutely anything. I'm an expert!
homework forum: //

http://www.engineering.com/AskForum/aff/32.aspx

faq731-376 forum1529

 

[haynewp]

I just got the free m48 app for my iPhone 6 Plus. There is also an m48+ app that costs $10. I am impressed they programmed this app to function and look just like an HP 48GX.

 

[3DDave]

This is the thing that perplexed me about RPN; people who say it's better write this:
1) Type 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9
2) Hit [+] eight times.
3) Result = 45

but really do this:

1 <enter> 2 <enter> 3 <enter> 4 <enter> 5 <enter> ... 9 + + + + + + + +

vs algebraic

1 + 2 + 3 + 4 + 5 + 6 + 7 + 8 + 9 = 45.

RPN requires more key presses and produces intermediate answers that don't match the output for the series addition.

While I appreciate that RPN has some efficiency in some cases, it never appealed to me to be a human optimizing compiler for translating algebraic functions to post-fix notation and to reorder operations to comply with an alternate philosophy.

 

[KootK]

You could do the sum on an HP more or less the same as you could on an algebraic, making the calculation equally efficient.

I was forced into using RPN in college. It took me about two weeks of frequent calculating to get acclimatized. My brain was plastic enough back then to pick it up swiftly. There is always something elegant and beautiful about the method that is optimally efficient in my opinion. That's why I like RPN, not because I'm convinced that I get to go home six secondS earlier each night because of RPN efficiency.

I like to debate structural engineering theory -- a lot. If I challenge you on something, know that I'm doing so because I respect your opinion enough to either change it or adopt it.

 

[IRstuff]

"1 + 2 + 3 + 4 + 5 + 6 + 7 + 8 + 9 = 45"

Same number of keystrokes
1<ENTER>2+3+4+5+6+7+8+9+ (45 is displayed)

TTFN
I can do absolutely anything. I'm an expert!
homework forum: //

http://www.engineering.com/AskForum/aff/32.aspx

faq731-376 forum1529

 

[XR250]

There is always something elegant and beautiful about the method that is optimally efficient in my opinion. That's why I like RPN, not because I'm convinced that I get to go home six secondS earlier each night because of RPN efficiency.

Totally agree. I probably actually waste more time using RPN as the HP11C I use has a pretty slow processor so you have to be careful not to get ahead of it - especially doing deflection calcs. After you hit 4y^x you have to pause to let it complete or you will get wrong answers. This was really a problem in college as I was punching numbers alot faster. The 15C solves this problem with a faster processor.
I figure any tool you use day in and day out should be elegant and beautiful as long as you are not compromising too much efficiency. Same reason I enjoy my Mac everyday.

 

[3DDave]

IRStuff - sure. I was making a bit of fun of the example. At best there's no special advantage to RPN, except that HP had nicer keypads. At worst, RPN (and other post-fix notations) require a larger mental model of the operations to keep the operations straight. Also, RPN calculators don't get borrowed as much in an algebraic calculator world.

 

[KootK]

At best there's no special advantage to RPN

I must object here. While I won't argue that RPN use is a significant efficiency improvement, it definitely represents an efficiency improvement. See wikipedia's explanation below which we may or many not choose to accept. The advantage may be nill for straight adding but it grows for more complex calculations, particularly where parentheses are involved. Given the prevalence of post-fix algorithms in computer science, it's a pretty hard to accept that there's no efficiency advantage. When in doubt regarding efficiency matters, see machines.

RPN (and other post-fix notations) require a larger mental model of the operations to keep the operations straight.

My experience is the exact opposite. With RPN, I find that I can start most anyplace that I see low hanging fruit and a path to completion will emerge without much effort. And it's almost impossible to make errors with order of operations in RPN because whatever operation you're performing will be executed on incoming arguments that sit right in front of your nose to be verified.

Practical implications
In comparison, testing of reverse Polish notation with algebraic notation, reverse Polish has been found to lead to faster calculations, for two reasons. Because reverse Polish calculators do not need expressions to be parenthesized, fewer operations need to be entered to perform typical calculations. Additionally, users of reverse Polish calculators made fewer mistakes than for other types of calculator.[5][6] Later research clarified that the increased speed from reverse Polish notation may be attributed to the fewer number of keystrokes needed to enter this notation, rather than to a smaller cognitive load on its users.[7] However, anecdotal evidence suggests that reverse Polish notation is more difficult for users to learn than algebraic notation.[6]

I like to debate structural engineering theory -- a lot. If I challenge you on something, know that I'm doing so because I respect your opinion enough to either change it or adopt it.

 

[IRstuff]

Ha, this good! Maybe we'll get a post count comparable to the climate change threads!

My personal experience, given Excel vs. HP11C is that lots of nested parentheses can get quite confusing, and if there are more than 4 to 5 nestings of parentheses, I have to double check to make sure I closed the parentheses correctly.

In any case, to each their own; just as there are people passionate about ME and people passionate about English Lit. and so forth, I can certainly see that algebraic vs. RPN might come down to just personal preference/personality.

TTFN
I can do absolutely anything. I'm an expert!
homework forum: //

http://www.engineering.com/AskForum/aff/32.aspx

faq731-376 forum1529

 

[3DDave]

In Excel you can separate the parts of a formula using shift-enter which places segments on individual lines, making for much easier reading.

I think RPN is to human-computer interface what Esperanto is to language, a solution to a problem that isn't severe enough to make the transition worth it for most users.

 

[3DDave]

Crud; in Excel it's left alt-enter. Shift-enter is used in a number of other editors for new-line without a paragraph break.

 

[KootK]

Yeah, we're obviously just in different camps. Short of an alien invasion, I think that Esperanto adoption would be the fasted route to global harmony. I'd be on board 100% if there were a critical mass of folks serious about it.

I like to debate structural engineering theory -- a lot. If I challenge you on something, know that I'm doing so because I respect your opinion enough to either change it or adopt it.

 

[BigH]

Excel - doing all your sin and cos in radians? Yeck (why calculators can default and spreadsheets can't?)

 

[Jerehmy]

Had no idea what RPN was. Had to look it up. Kind of want my money back from my math degree now...

 

[XR250]

Had no idea what RPN was. Had to look it up. Kind of want my money back from my math degree now...

Sadly, RPN appears to be slowly dying - similar to the manual transmission.

 

[andriver]

Sadly, RPN appears to be slowly dying - similar to the manual transmission.

As a car enthusiast, my car is and will always be a manual transmission.

I had to Google RPN as well, I am too proficient with my TI-89 or TI-30 to change my ways.

 

[IRstuff]

"Excel - doing all your sin and cos in radians? Yeck (why calculators can default and spreadsheets can't?)"

true, but radian is somewhat more engineering friendly than degree. A radian angle deviation multipled by the radius arm results in the arc length. You have to convert degree to radian to do that. Of course, in Mathcad, it's irrelevant, since it does the conversion on the fly.

TTFN
I can do absolutely anything. I'm an expert!
homework forum: //

http://www.engineering.com/AskForum/aff/32.aspx

faq731-376 forum1529