This sounds very serious. I know several people that I have thought belonged to thes organizsation, but I was never sure that it existed. Now, I am relitivly sure it does, and must be carful.

I just hope they don't find me...

-W-

I belong to the organisation and I will make you join us or YOUR MONEY BACK!!! seriously, RPN is my favorite mode of entry. I wish TI had it. (maybe it's idiot-proofing?)

AHHHH!!!!! RPN!!!!!! NOW YOU TOO!!!! Well, if you really want RPN, there are some programs in the archives (at least for the 86 and 83+) that allow you to enter expressions in RPN.

RPN?!?!!?? Everyone I know is so blissfully dumb with their scientific calculators, thinking that they can do anything with it...and the fact that not too many people like setting aside time to learn how to use their very simple graping calculator turns more and more people to the Dark Side. Most TI-83 owners don't know what secret potential they wield every time they turn theirs on (e.g., the equation solver, a godsend, the program editor, etc.) Nothing more shameful than wasted potential...

You forgot the finance solver...

It has an equasion solver ? :/
I use maple on my laptop for that :/

Well, that's the way to go...the 83+ (without symbolic) only gives numeric solutions...

Yeah, all you have to do is either check the manual or listen to me: Press MATH, then 0 to go to the bottom entry: the equation solver. Set the equation equal to zero and plug it in. Then press the down key and you will see at the top of the screen the equation, X=, Y=... (if you have more than one variable) and then "bound:{1EE99...or something like that. Put the cursor on X=, clear whatever's there, and then press 2nd, enter. Simple!!

Ummm...what do you think I meant by et cetera? For those who are taking Latin, is its word for word translation "and so on". "Et" is and, from "Et tu, Brutis?" (I hated that play)...anyway...c'est la vie

You came to no conclusion about RPN in that post. BTW, I've always wanted to learn it. TIGCC supports it and since I switched to Apple a few days before Christmas, I think it is about time to chane to RPN. Resistance to do so is futile for every man, woman, child, and those who mark "Yes Please" on test forms (you know who you are).

Do you know why HP made their first calcs RPN?

It wasn't because it was easy to use, it wasn't user-friendlyness or good looks, its just that ITS SO MUCH EASIER TO PROGRAM.

Anyone who knows ASM out there will find it alot easier to process a RPN entry that an algebraic one.

Example:

[for the 83+ ]
call getnumber ;routine to accept user input
ld hl, numbuffer
ld de, OP1
ld bc, 0009
ldir
call getnumber
ld hl, numbuffer
ld de, OP2
ld bc, 0009
ldir
operator:
B_CALL getKey
cp 80
jr nz,$+5
B_CALL FPAdd
ld a,2
cp 81
jr nz,$+5
B_CALL FPSub
ld a,2
cp 82
jr nz,$+5
B_CALL FPMult
ld a,2
cp 83
jr nz,$+5
B_CALL FPDiv
ld a,2
ret

It's very simple, whereas for a computer/calculator to interperate 1+1, it takes extra logic.

Fifty years ago, when processing power was everything, HP decided that using RPN to process input would be more processor-efficient.

This was justifiable as the time for a reletively smart human being to convert the algebraic expression was less that the time a machine could do it in, especially as quite often, there were many people queueing up for use of the computer.

Now, even when using 25-year-old processors (like the z80 in that poor TI81), good programming is by far faster that the time it takes to learn to quickly convert algebraic expressions into RPN.

This time could be better spent programming, working, burning, or even *ghasp* playing games on said calculator (maybe not that TI81...), rather than learning an obsolete way of communication to a calculator.

To correctly interface two machines, they must have a common protocol. The same applies to a human and a machine. Currently, the two protocols available are algebraic entry and RPN. All the math you learn in school, and probably university as well is in the algebraic protocol.

Staying with the algebraic protocol when interfaceing with your calculator allows uncomprimised transmission with little loss. To convert the algebraic data into a form accepted by RPN allows a larger margin for error.

In conclusion, RPN was invented as a way to allow the greatest usage of valuable processing time. Now, like the sliderule, it is obsolete. STAY AWAY.

That's my $AU0.20

PS. I accept no responsibility for any damages incurred to any property of those who choose to burn their calculators.

PPS. Joey, I heard that you got an HP49G+. Could you take a hi-resolution movie of it burning...

Thanks for the money, soon I'll be able to go buy a Dr. Pepper...

good luck, $AU0.20 can buy you shit. (think $US0.70 = $AU1.00)

Yeah, he was referring to the old expression "putting his two cents in", and apparently, he's an Aussie man, man.

I agree. There's no point in using RPN, now that there's enough processing power/memory etc. so that it's easy enough to make calcs that can process algebraic expressions. RPN isn't hard to figure out, but it's a waste of time. As you said, everything you've been taught is expressed algebraically, not in RPN, so you're always going to have to convert to RPN before entering it in the calc, which really seems like a waste of time to me-especially when it's not that hard to make a parser for algebraic expressions.

So because we have progressively faster technology programmers can become lax and create more piece-o-crap stuff? If there is a faster way to do something, then do it that way. In the end you'll save time, which is money.

yes... It is usually faster to program in an inefficient high-level language and get a faster computer to run it on than it is to write everything in ASM.

As I was saying, the time it takes a calculator to convert an algebraic expression into RPN is MUCH LESS than the time it takes YOU to.

If it were more cost-effective to write things in ASM, why doesn't micro$oft do it.

And why did Sun Microsystems write C.

In this day and age, (except when programming TI's, which have limited processing power), it is alot easier to get a faster processor than it is to rewrite and entire database in ASM

Sun Microsystems did not write C (as in create the language).

Some guy at Bell Labs wrote it (Dennis Ritchie, co-inventor of Unix).

Yeah, what I wanna know is why TI won't put any more memory than what little there is. There's cards smaller than a quarter that can hold a crapload number of times more than what's in that bulky *ss calculator. Where's all that space going to? Parts? The Voyage 200 is much more powerful than anything else TI has to offer, and it's much thinner than anything else.

What are you TALKING about?? Most people on this site are fully aware of the potential of the tools. Most other people are at least marginally aware of the programming capabilities, even if they only use it to get games from other people and play them.

Well, duh. Yeah, some people are slightly aware of what power they wield in a math class if you waltz in with a graphing calculator, but I told people about an equation solver, and they thought I was bluffing...until I showed them, of course. (See, nerds can command a certain degree of respect)

How about the people who spend the extra $30 for the Silver Edition, but don't know anything different on it, except for the "cool" case, and maybe puzzpack. My Alg II teacher went on and on to us about how the TI-89 has all this extra stuff, most notably quadratic (and higher) factoring, and I'm sitting there plugging everything into my SE. Of course, I never do that on tests; most of it's too easy anyways. But, the point remains that people spend the extra money on the gray translucent case, then don't bother on what's preinstalled, or how to install 1.5MB of more stuff on it, like games.

The 86 can factor polynomials too-you don't need an 89 for that.

If anyone gives you the answers in parentheses to all or all but one of these questions, start investigating them as a possible member of the RPN cult.
1. Do you think you look good in black robes? (Yes)
2. If you were given a TI-81 and a TI-89 Titanium and told to burn one, which one would you burn? (The TI-89 Titanium).
3. What is your opinion on Reverse Polar/Polish Notation? (I like it)
4. You go on a web site with two links; education.ti.com and hp.com. Which one do you click? (Hp.com)
I attempted these questions on my math teacher, and she attempted to dodge them.