Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

The Future of RPN Calculators

Posted by CowboyNeal on from the back-in-effect dept.

Noksagt writes "HP's recent release of the 33s won't be the last RPN calculator. Former HPers at Hydrix are hyping an impressive Linux-based PDA/calculator, named Qonos. They have a survey up regarding features, etc. More information can be found at comp.sys.hp48 or The Museum of HP Calculators. A new open hardware project called OpenRPN has also begun. Their mission is to produce horizontal and vertical format scientific RPN calcs and later a graphing calc."

7 of 301 comments (clear)

  1. Re:My survey response by DonServo · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Inconvenient? I can perform complex calculations MUCH faster using RPN than I can with an algebraic calculator. No worries about misplaced parantheses!

  2. Re:My survey response by Short+Circuit · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Spoken like someone who's never used it.

    I was addicted after using it for, oh, a month. It took some getting used to, though. Unfortunately, I didn't realize I liked it until the calculator (HP 48g+) was stolen. I pity the poor sap here on campus who buys it from whoever stole it, but isn't able to use it.

    --
    tasks(723) drafts(105) languages(484) examples(29106)
  3. ??? - More Detail, please. by students · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I am going to start calculus next year as a softmore. Can you explain this in more detail, with out actually using calculus? I want to know because I would like to buy a new calculator this summer, and I want to share this with my calculus teacher. I've tried RPN on my TI-83 plus (with RMN III and CABAMAP applications), and found it to be minorly surperior.

    --
    Simon's Rock College
    1. Re:??? - More Detail, please. by shobadobs · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I would suggest getting the HP-49G+. (I am a 49G user.) RPN might only be "minorly better," but the real question comes down to the operating system's user interfaces. The 49G's is simply far better. In RPN mode, the user can use all the calculator's features without having to jump through dialogue boxes all the time. For example, say I wanted to graph a sine curve. Instead of having to go to the "Y=" menu and such, with which we're all familiar, I merely need to type X [SIN] EQ [STO] [PLOT] [F4] [F5] [F6]. (and I can press F4 F5 F6 in very quick succession) It is really nice to use.

      After having used a TI-89, then an HP-49G, when I try going back to the TI-89 for some purpose (maybe a game, or a program i once made), I really start to notice how annoying and slow the 89's UI is.

      The HP is also much more customizable. The ability to remap the keyboard is quick, easy, and built in. There are 128 system flags for changing user settings, accessible via the MODES menu. The HP has no limit to the depth of the directory tree. Its menus are better -- they are at the bottom of the screen, somewhat like the TI-85 and Ti-86's menus, rather than having to type Shift MATH 4 4 every time you need to use a specific function.

      One of the neatest things is programming. Its programming language, Reverse Polish Lisp, is simple yet powerful. Plus, it has a built-in compiler for System Reverse Polish Lisp, and ASM.

      Plus, text-editing on the HP 49G/G+ is much, much easier. When in ALPHA mode, one can type both letters and numbers because the number pad has no letters on it.

      I used it for BC Calculus this year, and it easily served my needs.

    2. Re:??? - More Detail, please. by TastyWords · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Big hint: even if calculators are permitted, do your best to see if you can do it long-hand. If you punch everything in, you aren't actually doing the work and you aren't actually learning the process, no matter what someone says ("The only way you can punch the right keys is if you understand what you're doing.") longhand provides better comprehension of the problem. Besides, if you get an answer you don't trust, it's easier to look through what you've done and trace your work. Punch it into a calculator and you may or may not have gotten it right - if nothing else, use it for verification if you are so inclined. But be careful - I had a prof in Advanced Calc and DiffEq who loved to give problems whose answer would be "2" or "3.7" - something which would instill doubt in most minds - "How can it have such a simple result?"

      There is a real-world situation for this: to learn to walk a tight-rope, bring it down until it's 6" off the floor. Most people have no problems practicing that way. But it's the same rope. The only difference is in your mind.

      The only "real math" classes I took in college were Calc III, Advanced Calc, and DiffEq. I hated real math that much. Having studied under Hofstadter and Erdos while in high school made me realize I needed to be open & free in my thinking - abstract algebra, group theory, and Galois' work made me realize how much more suited I was for "pure math". It's so open and you can create anything you want to with your imagination.
      I just wish the regular high school classes taught students something other than "real math" algebra and calculus so students could see a difference and which is better suited for them.

  4. Re:My survey response by khuber · · Score: 3, Interesting
    There's a huge problem with regular RPN and complex equations - you can't go back and edit an expression you just evaluated like you can with algebraic.

    Having to reenter a large formula just to change a constant is a pain with RPN. Once you get into that Mathematica/Maple working mode where you edit expressions I think algebraic wins.

    I have an HP48SX and HP48GX which I like but never use -- I use a great command line program called "calc" in Linux. If I don't have calc I use bc. Both have readline support (assuming GNU bc).

  5. The past and future of RPN by Nybble's+Byte · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I've been using HP calculators ever since buying an HP-35 in 1973. I wandered off the path a couple of times but not for long, because RPN just makes total sense.

    The tremendous success of the HP-12C in business is proof enough. And ask any HP-41 user how he likes his machine. The thing is a tool that helps you get a job done in as few steps as possible.

    I use a 48GX or 49g+ every day. I much prefer the 48GX keyboard and the location of the Enter key (although I'm slowly getting used to that), but everything else about the 49g+ is better: much faster, much better and slightly larger display, and lots more 'stuff'.

    Unlike some people I don't mind the 48/49 implementation of RPN (actually RPL) compared with the old style 4-level stack, but a lot of old timers refuse to use the RPL machines that started with the 28. At the same time I still like the 41/42 a lot. There's surely a place for machines like the 32S II. It remains to be seen how the 33S with its odd looking keyboard does in the marketplace.

    I'm one of a very few who have an HP PDA based on Linux that never made it to production. Display contrast isn't very good, but otherwise it's decent but not feature laden because the project got killed and people lost their jobs. For this reason it's heartening that someone's talking about doing an HP handheld running Linux, and I'll support their efforts any way I can. It's about time for the user community to pitch in - this reminds me of the PPC 44 project talked about what, 20 years ago?