Re: HP's and TI's calculator output rate
[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re: HP's and TI's calculator output rate
Richard Goedeken wrote:
> Yeah, I never really got into learning how to use it well maybe because
> personally
> I believe that (for me at least) the calculator should work the way I
> want it to,
> not the other way around.. And the 48 just didn't work the way I wanted
> it to..
> The way that it expected you to give it parameters, the programming
> language,
> everything seemed fubared.
This was a complaint of mine when I first got my 48. There were certain this
that I
wondered why it would be done the way it was done. As I became more
experienced, I
found that the way the 48 did things was more efficient. Take RPL, for
example. When
you use RPL, it makes sense: you have arguments and a function, like add: 2
reals and
then add. Algebraic defies all logic. How can you apply an operation like
plus to one
argument. This means that internally the algebraic calcs convert the input
format to
RPN. All calculators work this way internally and, to the programmer, it makes
the most
sense to have arguments and *then* call the function.
> I'm not even talking about the GUI being slow.. Just try and add a
> string of
> numbers. I haven't used one in a while, but I remember the data entry
> being
> excruciatingly slow.. Say you wanted to do 1+2+3+4+5+6+7+8+9
> (hypothetical
> example).. As fast as you can, hit 1<enter>2<plus>3<plus>4<plus>etc...
> The damn
> thing would bog down, fill up the keyboard buffer, etc, and you'd be
> waiting
> a couple of seconds for the fricking result.
Ah... but this is the beauty of the stack. Instead of moving back and forth
between the
"+" key, then number keys, and the ENTER key, you can push all the arguments
onto the
stack and then add them by pressing the "+" key multiple times.
> To me that is
> unacceptable. With
> the 85 you just punch the string in, hit the enter key, and bam there
> you go.
>
For something like this, if the RPN bugs you, you can always press the
algebraic
delimiters and then enter everything as you would on an alg calc and then
EVAL...
> >
> > This statement is entirely invalid. The HP48 does not use any such "object
> > oriented" design. You are confusing HP "objects" with something like C++
> > "objects". HP "objects" are simply a means of separating data types (like
stings,
> > reals, binaries, etc.).
>
> HP seems to think they do.. I bought the 48 programming manual, and
> started
> reading it. On one of the first pages it said something like "at HP we
> encourage
> an object-oriented approach to programming, so blahblahblah..." At that
> point I
> think I closed the book and didn't open it again.
I cannot find any such statement in the users manual or the AUR. I can assure
you that
the 48 uses no object-oriented programming. I have programmed on it for a few
years now
in both the user and the system language and it is not OOP. If you consult the
good old
RPLMAN, William Wicks could tell you that HP "objects" are nothing more than
data
types. OOP includes (but is not limited to) the following :
- POLYMORPHISM - the only one that the *user* language supports due to special
implemtation of the system code
- CLASS - the 48 supports data types, but not classes
- INHERITANCE - the 48 does not support this
Something like C++ supports a "hierarchy" of objects, the 48 does not support
this
either. Don't misunderstand: the 48 has the tools to implement OOP to some
degree, but
it is not present unless under special implementation. Bottom line is: the 48
is not
OOP. period.
> > This depends on how well the "environment" was set up on the HP. The calc
is,
> > what I would call, "highly customizable". If set up properly, the user can
access
> > just about any function directly from the stack. TIs seem to be a bit more
"user
> > friendly" and that is why people settle for what takes the least effort to
learn.
>
> Similarly, X win is more configurable than windows, but personally (hey
> I know this
> sucks, I hate MS just as much as anyone else) I think that windows has a
> better
> interface than X, and I dont even think you can even configure X to be
> as good as
> win.. Sure win crashes all the time, but thats another story.. I guess
> I'm the
> kind of person who doesn't really want to fuck around with learning how
> to set
> everything up when I can get a calc that works right out of the box.
Similarly, a calculator is more configurable than an abucus, but personally
(hey
I know this
sucks, I hate the abucus just as much as anyone else) I think that the abucus
has a
better
interface than calculators, and I dont even think you can even configure
calculators to
be
as good asan abucus.. Sure an abucus has it's limitations, but thats another
story..I
guess I'm the
kind of person who doesn't really want to fuck around with learning how
to set
everything up when I can get a abucus that works right out of the box.
Wouldn't it be worth the time and effort to learn how to use a more powerful
device???
>
>
> > There is plenty of nice freeware for the HP48. I will agree that
"out-of-box" the
> > HP48 does lack in many symbolic areas, but for anyone who bothers to look,
there
> > is freeware available that will blow away any TI8x and is very comparable
to the
> > 92 in symbolic manipulation. If there was anything that I would remove
from the
> > ROM of the HP, it would be the equation library. It's use is limited and
there
> > are many other things that would be better in it's place.
>
> Yeah, I hacked a link cable and threw a few games on the 48 when I had
> it.. That
> was all fucked up too. All these bullshit libraries to deal with, and
> you had
> to go through all these screwy commands to get anything to run,
It is not difficult. The manual outlines how this is to done in chapter 28
under "To
set up a library:". Libraries are very useful. The idea is to store data and
applications that are used frequently and are not made to be modified in a
library and
when this is done, that app acts as a ROM pointer instead of an indentifier
(variable).
Libraries are compact and any library progra that calls another program is
converted to
a ROMPTR instead of an ID making it very fast.
> and I
> was never
> really sure how to delete things
This is also clearly outlined in the users manual. It is very simple and
quick. There
are multiple ways to do this. You can PURGE many vars using a list {} or one
var by
using the tick marks ' ' and then press PURGE. This is a very simple
operation... I
don't know why it was giving you so much difficulty...
> or find out what existed and was taking
> up
> memory..
anything listed in the VARS menu visible at the bottom of the stack is stored
in user
memory. The VARS command brings up a list of all variables stored in user mem
and the
command PVARS brings up a list of all vars / libs stored in the specified port.
That's
not so painful now is it?
> AFU.. Totally AFU. I learned how to do these tasks, but then
> I'd forget
> again because they were so strange. Personally I like the 92 with the
> Fargo shell.
> Easy to run programs, easy to check memory usage and delete. Piece of
> cake.
>
There are filers available that do a very nice job of exactly that. You just
have to
look for them as you did for the games. If you had problems, then you could
have posted
here and anyone would have been happy to help you. There is a FAQ available
that covers
some things that are not addressed in the users manual and some that are.
Instead, you
post here explaining how the 48 is so crappy and is so hard to use without ever
having
asked for help. Don't be so quick to point the finger when you haven't
bothered to ask
first. This is a lesson I have learned many-a-time here and I have looked like
a fool
just as you do when you first posted in this chain.
> Yeah, you're right, the 48 does have much nicer solid-feeling keys than
> the TIs..
> That was never really that important to me. To each his own.
True.. whatever floats your boat...
> I don't know that I had very limited experience - I owned one for over a
> year.
That's plenty of time to become accustomed to using the 48. If the uses were
few and
long between, then I can understand, but if you used it often and were still
baffled
about the basic memory usage, etc.. then I can offer no reasonable explanation
of why
you had trouble with it.
> I liked the cloth carrying case - that was nice, as well as the feel of
> the calc
> (casing, buttons, etc) HP did a nice job with those regards. I never
> found anything
> that the 48 did that the 85 couldn't,
You didn't look hard enough. Look a little harder... Is the 85 expandable up
to 4 meg
of RAM? Does the 85 have an IR port? Does the 85 have a clock? How about 17
different
plot types, alarms, ports, access to 3 programming languages, etc, etc?
> and to me the fact that the 85
> felt so much
> faster (computing, entering data, etc) was the most important thing..
Like I said, it depends on what you use: built-in functions or re-written ml
functions. There is a replacement for just about everything.
> I
> can deal
> with the cheap case and buttons. Hopefully I wont be taking any
> standardized tests
> anymore (not planning on grad skool right now). You're right about the
> 92 being
> too big; that kinda sucks, although having a big keyboard and display is
> nice.
>
> I guess it all comes down to what you like, what you can accept, and
> what you
> can't accept.. Everyone has their preferences.
Quite true.
I don't mean to be rude when I post this. Most of your complaints are results
of not
having asked for help or suggestions when you encountered a problem. But I
suppose that
is your loss; not mine.
--
Aaron.
Follow-Ups:
References: