If you give me any ideas and math formulas and science formulas, i'll make programs with them.

I have a suggestion:
There is a great assembler programm "The Trig Machine v3.6" for the ti82 and ti86. But it doesn't work on my Voyage 200 :-(

Why not make a version of this program for the TI89/92/V200??

Would be great!

Ok. I read this article, and immediately knew what I wanted to say. I agree that we need more Math and Science programs. The 85 ASM area has none. That's where I quit agreeing. The periodic table to 7 decmials? Do you realize that if you carried the weights out for every element to 7 places that would take 7*108=864 bytes of memory! I wouldn't want to waste that much space. Neither would most people I dont' think. If you would like to, then write your own program. I know some of you don't know how to program (or as you say "not very well") that's not a problem. I couldn't do a freakin' line of assembly a year ago. There are plenty of people here to teach you. This is a pretty friendly community, so instead of demanding that someone writes you programs, why don't you politely ask if someone could teach you how to program. I am reminded of an excellent quote:

Give a man a fish, he eats for a day; teach a man to fish and he eats for life.

Great words. Bear those in mind next time you NEED a program written.

Thanks for reading... :^)

I totally agree. I use a TI-82 and am not very good at programming (although I am decent in TI-BASIC.) I can't find ANY math programs worth using (no offense to anyone who writes them.) If they had more formulae then I might consider using them. But to download the Pythagorean Theorem? That's a waste of time.

Rob Hornick
First Post he he

Do you realize that not all of the programmers out there are in high level math or science courses? They can't put all of the things that other people might know into their programs. They probably programmed it to help them on a test. Don't try to discourage people from programming something because they don't know everything about it. It's good practice for other, better programs.
Another point about only making programs for complicated things. What might seem easy to some people *is* comlicated for others. Programs for simple things just eliminate steps in figuring out bigger problems where small steps are needed.
I do agree that there are more heavy duty programs needed. It would be really nice if people (like Kirk Meyer who wants to do useful stuff) could convert from Basic to Assembly to make them faster.

I totally agree, I think many of the simple programs are some of the ones I use the most. Even though I'm taking Calculus, I still use my quadratic formula program more than any other program. I'm not saying more advanced programs would not be helpful, I'm just saying fairly simple ones can be very useful.

I don't know about the other TI calcs, but the TI-86 has a polynomial equation solver built in. Just press [2nd][PRGM] (Poly) and then you can solve most any equation, from 1st degree (although you don't need a calculator for it) on up.

Yeah. Both the 85 and 86 have that poly function. Most people don't realize that half the functions they use on a daily basis (like the quadratic formula) are build in to the calculator. Why not use the calc's build in function instead of an slower asm or much slower basic program? People should take more time reading the manuals to learn what capabilities their calcs have instead of whining. Anyway, I too wrote lots of little programs for my algebra 2 and precalc classes ranging from law of sins and cosines, hyperbolas and lots of other stuff, and I never published them on this site or any other because of the code hacking problem.

I didn't say that programs should ONLY be made for complex things. But there should be more complex programs out there. For example, I'm in the International Baccalaureate program, which is a heavy-duty advanced high school program. I'm in the IB Math Methods II class, which is equivalent to Calculus II. I'd love to make good calculus programs, etc, but I don't do assembler. Perhaps it would be a good idea if someone could convert TI-Basic programs into assembly. :-D

Well, even if you don't do assembler you can still release a program in basic. I'm sure that no one will complain. I released a couple calc programs for the 86, such as a volume of revolution that shows the picture, and nobody complained at all. It might not of been much, but it helped on the AP Calc test and I hope it helps someone else in the future.

No offens SLT, but you dont seem to understand how hard assembler is. You have limited variables to use, and only one can do certain functions, like subtract :-(. assembler is also hard to learn caus most tutorials dont explain it too much caus the authors know it well

example prog

#include "ti86asm.inc"

.org _asm_exec_ram

call _clrLCD ; clear the screen
ld hl, $0000 ; stores $00 in h, $00 in l
ld (_curRow),hl ; stores 0 in _curRow, 0 in _curCol
ld hl, Hard ; hl points to string Hard
call _puts ; print the string
ld a, '!' ; load ! character in A
call _putc ; print '!'
call _newline ; go to next line
ret ; return from program

Hard:
.db "Assembler is Hard",0

.end

plus that you need to have a compiler to translate it into hexadecimal or compiled hex
so, many people who know assembler (i do not know it, i just sort of copied that prog) dont want to make math progs caus it would be HARD with so limited variables

No offens SLT, but you dont seem to understand how hard assembler is. You have limited variables to use, and only one can do certain functions, like subtract :-(. assembler is also hard to learn caus most tutorials dont explain it too much caus the authors know it well

example prog

#include "ti86asm.inc"

.org _asm_exec_ram

call _clrLCD ; clear the screen
ld hl, $0000 ; stores $00 in h, $00 in l
ld (_curRow),hl ; stores 0 in _curRow, 0 in _curCol
ld hl, Hard ; hl points to string Hard
call _puts ; print the string
ld a, '!' ; load ! character in A
call _putc ; print '!'
call _newline ; go to next line
ret ; return from program

Hard:
.db "Assembler is Hard",0

.end

look at all those routines!!! would take on line in basic. plus that you need to have a compiler to translate it into hexadecimal or compiled hex
so, many people who know assembler (i do not know it, i just sort of copied that prog) dont want to make math progs caus it would be HARD with so limited variables

Unless I'm mistaken, it says in the TI-86 manual that you can compile/compress/whatever BASIC programs into ASM.

Don't know about the other calcs though...

I am an extremely good math programmer, although, I am not that good at programming math programs in Z80 Assembly. I am making the ultimate math program right now, but I don't know how to convert it to Z80 Assembly, and if I did, then it would mean a lot to me, because that way my math program which takes up about 8,500 bytes, would run a lot quicker and would be a lot smaller.

Well... you're close. What is listed in the manual is the function AsmComp(. This function will compile any text-format machine code into hex-format machine code, reducing its size to about 50% of the original. But the point is, for this function to work, an assembly program must be converted to some form of hex from assembly source code in the first place... so you really need an external program (or something like ZAC) to write assembly for the calculator, unless you're going to devote your life to memorizing z80 machine code...

YOU CAN ONLY COMPILE "TEXT" PROGRAMS INTO ASSEMBLY-NOT BASIC!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Some people are luckier than others. I am not allowed to use my graphing calculator on tests or quizzes because my math teacher saw that I was using programs so now she allows no one to use them. My parents won't allow me to use it either because they consider it cheating. I get home at 5:30 with my math homework and 8 hours worth of homework from other subjects every night plus projects in most subjects. I have tons of fun.(sorry, I'm just feeling bad for myself)

Tell your parents that things like a calculator cannot be evil or dishonest, only the attitude that the person applies. This is the sort of garbage that parents love.

I have a small comment on the precission thing: It seems a little anal retentive to want atomic masses to the 8th decimal unless you are a Chem/Physics Doctorate working at NASA, but something I've found that accomodates such people is using a data table or matrix to store the information. That way, people who aren't super preceise can input 16 in for the mass of O, or 15.9994. An example, Michael Van Der Kolk and I wrote an atomic mass program that takes, say, "H2O" and breaks it into the formula 2*mass("H")+mass("O"). When it looked through the matrix, if it didn't find "O", it asked the user for the mass of O. The user then has the choice of which he wants to input, 16 or 15.9994. This saves the memory of storing the entire periodic table's worth of masses (How many people truely use Einsteinium in an equation?) while allowing flexibility for users.

What we REALLY need are math program that dont just give you decimal answers. I have yet to see a math teacher that will let me write out decimal answers. They always want it in terms of Pi or in radical form. That means for every chapter I have to write my own programs to solve the equations...The only program I've seen that does this is Quadster, which shows you all the steps of solving a quadratic equation, and its fast too!

No offense at all, but to do that is (in my opinion) pointless...Anyone even using things like pi should know how to convert back...getting a number equal to 1.5(pi)...just divide by pi and you'd get 1.5. If someone lacks the basic math skills to do that they shouldn't be using a TI, but pencil and paper...

mike

Yes, but when you have many layers and functions (cos, pi, log, etc.), it gets much more difficult. Besides, sparing the step of dividing things back out can't hurt! :)

I think you are overlooking solutions like:
3(pi)^2, 2/(pi), e^(2*pi), etc...

oooooooooooooooh roast!

I agree that programs need to give answers in exact form, and the truth is, there are a fair number that do. The big problem is, its hard to tell which ones do and which ones don't without downloading and trying ever program. I got frustrated trying to find a good quadratic formula program, so I wrote one myself on my TI-83 (called "qadratic"). Somehow the math programs need to be described in enough detail so that it is possible to tell the quality of the program without having to download it. Another idea: have each program be rated.

There are plenty of programs out there that can convert decimals to other forms. One of the best I've seen is built into the larger TI-85 basic program, Graftbl. It converts decimals to fractions, whole numbers multiplied by pi, fractions multiplied by pi, and whole numbers and fractions containing square roots. It's also extremely fast (for basic), getting results involving values around 50 in under 10 seconds.