[A83] Re: Symbolic...

To: <assembly-83@lists.ticalc.org>
Subject: [A83] Re: Symbolic...
From: "Michael Vincent" <vincentm@cox.net>
Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2002 14:17:21 -0700
References: <freemail.20020310231740.12904@fm6.freemail.hu>
Reply-To: assembly-83@lists.ticalc.org


I love MID$...Actually you have the sub() function where you have
sub(string, start, length)

Michael Vincent
Detached Solutions - www.detacheds.com
Radical Software - www.radicalsoft.org
www.michaelv.org
----- Original Message -----
From: "Patai Gergely" <patai.ti@freemail.hu>
To: <assembly-83@lists.ticalc.org>
Sent: Wednesday, April 10, 2002 2:17 PM
Subject: [A83] Re: Symbolic...


>
> > I write programs to do things, at first to not have to
> spend time on them,
> > bu t then end up learing how to dothe thing better
> because the program was
> > a bear to write.  Perhaps teachers should /require/
> students to write a
> > program to perform functions.
>
> Actually, still referring to IB, it's in practice
> impossible to pass the final exam in maths if you don't
> have the appropriate programs on your calculator, simply
> because you won't have the time to finish. (Things like
> distance between a point and a line, intersection of two
> planes etc.) But that's also true that you can't expect the
> students to learn asm - and symbolic would be a beast to
> write in pure basic. Does the TI-Basic actually have
> anything similar to the ancient MID$ function? Because only
> that would make this possible (although I'm not really
> convinced that such a program could fit in the RAM).
>
> PG
>
>
>

References:

[A83] Re: Symbolic...

From: Patai Gergely <patai.ti@freemail.hu>