Re: Various notes about the TI 92
[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Aaron Bergman wrote:
> My guess is that the 92 probably tries substitution first and it
> comes up with 0^0 which is often defined to be 1 to make certain
> formula prettier.
I think that may be it as well - if so, that just means that the 92
evaluates limits in a horrible way.
> But 0^2 is a positive zero, you see. It makes a weird sort of
> sense, really. Lim x->0 of 1/x^2 = +oo, for example.
I'm not saying I don't understand why it did that; I thought of the
above example myself (and it fits with the fact that the 92 gives 0^3,
1/ans(1)=undef), but no matter how you cut it, the 92 is still wrong
on this.
It doesn't make sense for the 92 to say that 1/0 is undefined and then,
two or three lines later, to say that it's equal to infinity. The 92's
symbolic manipulation routines leave much to be desired when it comes to
dealing with infinity.
> Why not implement RSA? :)
Good idea. You do the implementation and I'll beta test it. :)
- Paul
paulp@televault.com
References: