Slashdot Mirror
7 of the Best Free Linux Calculators
An anonymous reader writes "One of the basic utilities supplied with any operating system is a desktop calculator. These are often simple utilities that are perfectly adequate for basic use. They typically include trigonometric functions, logarithms, factorials, parentheses and a memory function. However, the calculators featured in this article are significantly more sophisticated with the ability to process difficult mathematical functions, to plot graphs in 2D and 3D, and much more. Occasionally, the calculator tool provided with an operating system did not engender any confidence. The classic example being the calculator shipped with Windows 3.1 which could not even reliably subtract two numbers. Rest assured, the calculators listed below are of precision quality."
No maxima? How about kmplot?
Don't thank God, thank a doctor!
While technically not a "calculator", unless you run it in interactive mode, RPL/2 is one of the oldest and most mature of any HP28/48/49/50 style UserRPL interpreters.
What makes it so awesome is its ability to interface with the OS via POSIX compliant commands -- it's almost like using your HP48 as a scripting tool for Unix.Too bad they didn't mention it.
jdb2
# cat
Damn, my RAM is full of llamas.
DC or BC are more than adequate, are already in 99% of the distros out there and are chock full of features!
Or "anything more complicated than adding a few numbers, it's easier to open a calculator than to learn how any particular spreadsheet functions".
That's really just a fancy way of saying that you are familiar with a spreadsheet, and not with a calculator program.
# cat
Damn, my RAM is full of llamas.
My favorite Linux calculator:
function math
{
echo "scale=2 ; $*" | sed -e "s:x:*:g" | sed -e "s:,::g" | bc
}
$ math 12,147.2 x 3
36441.6
I'm amazed they left out the hp48 emulator. It was an amazing calculator, and the emulator does exactly what it it is supposed to do - everything.
It did everything a calculator is supposed to do, and it was _almost_ able to boil my coffee.
After my 10 years working with programming, this is still the environment i love the most. Actually it is probably the only thing i still know the exact location of at all times.
I love beeing a geek :)
I still use the TI89 that I've had for almost 10 years, because to this day I have yet to find a desktop symbolic calculator that satisfies me.
I use matlab for work, and its command line interface to maple is decent. What I really want, though, is to somehow combine a command line interface with a nice typeset display - visually parsing the results is so much faster that way. Does such a thing exist?
I use bc and I like better than any GUI based calculator. Compiled with readline functionality, it just rocks in my humble opinion:
~$ bc
bc 1.06
Copyright 1991-1994, 1997, 1998, 2000 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
This is free software with ABSOLUTELY NO WARRANTY.
For details type `warranty'.
scale=5
(2*80/3.333)^3
110625.18091
((2*80/3.333)^3)/21
5267.86575
man bc for details
Everything I write is lies, read between the lines.
Emacs Calc, i.e. "M-x calc" in Emacs is by far the best calculator I've ever seen.
Here's the blurb from the manual:
That list gives you a bit of an idea, but doesn't really capture how just darn cool Calc is; it just seems to do everything.... (The things I particularly value are the vector/matrix operations and the symbolic manipulation operators.)
It's (default) model is HP-style RPN, except of course with a much larger visible stack, and multi-level undo.
[You have to be careful tho because recent releases of Emacs come with two calculators -- a "simple" one, which you get with "M-x calculator", and the super incredible one you get with "M-x calc"... (yes it's kind of silly, but as usual with Emacs, there are historical reasons...]
We live, as we dream -- alone....
Crikey. I had to use that cr*p. There is no way any company that put out a product like Windows 3.1 could ever be bashed enough.
I've really come to like the SpeedCrunch calculator, which is available as a Debian package, and (according to their website) also runs on Windows and Mac. It's probably not inteded for scientific calculations, and it can't display graphs, but it has a very simple interface ideal for quick calculations. The tooltip with the current result of unfinished expressions is a nice touch, as is the history of past calculations (session).
CJ
Ah, arrogance and stupidity, all in the same package. How efficient of you. -- Londo Mollari
That's really just a fancy way of saying that you are familiar with a spreadsheet, and not with a calculator program.
Maybe it's just a way of saying that he thinks visually instead of mathematically, and finds it more useful to see an entire spreadsheet with notes and information, where he can look at parts of the formula at once.
I'm math-challenged, and find the spreadsheet easier to use, too. It's not because I know Excel better than bc. I don't really know either worth a shit. It's because I think visually, and not numerically. My hat's off to you if you can think numerically, but I haven't learned how yet.
Don't be so sure you know everything.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
I don't know about those in the article (never heard of any of them), but here's what I use: Emacs M-x calc, maxima and QtOctave. Gnuplot for graphs. Often Google or python shell for quick things, if I'm too lazy to open emacs calc. I'm surprised none of those were mentioned in article.
what more could you possibly want?
You kinda make a good point. In my opinion, the difference between a calculator and a program is a GUI interface with buttons for numbers and functions. Almost everything mentioned in the discussion(but not the article) are command-line calculators and computer algebra systems.
Gnome's calculator is excellent for basic stuff. Compared to Windows, Linux is still severely lacking with the usability of Computer Algebra Systems - many of which are still commmand-line( in before 'Get off my lawn'), though some have very crappy GUI wrappers which open plots in new windows. That's one of my biggest pet peeves as a student and recent Linux convert. Needing 2 or three open windows(terminal, gui, plots) is too cluttered for those of us who are spoiled with things like Maple*. On the other end of the usability spectrum, there's the labyrinthine Sage, which requires running in Mozilla if you want a GUI! That caused usability problems with NoScript even before I started to use the damn thing, and now it won't even start again without tinkering. I might even make room for a Windows partition for Maple or Matlab, or run them in VMs.
* Yes, I know they make 'em for *NIX. They just might be the first Linux programs I'll actually buy.
Desktop calculators are for losers, and here's why:
Everybody knows that all real engineers use a slide rule.
In those rare cases where a slide rule doesn't quite cut it you have a perfectly good excuse to go and ask the hot intern three cubicles down for help. Chicks dig guys who can admit a shortcoming, and who dare ask for help when they can't quite figure it out. It's an almost idiot proof way to score, second only to having pictures of nephews/nieces/puppies on your desk. So get yourself a slide rule and the rest is up to you: What has your desktop calculator done for you lately?
I prefer the Python interactive shell and GNU Octave (or any other Matlab-compatible environment, including Matlab itself) for numerical calculations, Asymptote for plots and other methods of data visualisation, Maxima when a CAS is in order and LaTeX to turn all the stuff generated by those packages into something readable and publishable.
Throw in some scripted links between all those tools, a few functions from Peter Acklam's Matlab Utilities, your favourite function for converting a matrix to a LaTeX table and saving it into a file in a single call, a few exec()-equivalents here and there, and you'll get a rig that auto-regenerates your report/publication/thesis/shopping list/whatever else you might have been doing, in a single run of a single program, should you spot a mistake somewhere deep in the calculations, or a typo in the input.
For one, I don't think I'll ever understand people who use spreadsheets. And copy their results to the word processor. And then spot a mistake in a formula, fix it and proceed to copy the new, correct results from scratch. And then spot a typo in the data.
Why biased? Well, I'm studying control systems and robotics. It's all about task automation. Besides, everything in this field involves using Matlab for something, and just about everyone in the academia (the technical side of it, at least) is using LaTeX, so you just kind of get used to using those two for just about anything after a while, and automating everything with scripts.
Of course, the above assumes somtheing more complicated than a few basic operations in a single line. We're talking about sophisticated calculators here. For simple tasks I'm just using Google...
This is Slashdot. Common sense is futile. You will be modded down.
OK linux calculator and math geeks, here's a question I have wondered about before. This is just for fun, show off your leet skillz. Start with the first released linux kernel, get the size, look at some major releases, etc, do your magic as of today's sized kernel, and give us the best guess in your graph or projection when the kernel will reach or exceed one gigabyte in size, the release date as close as possible.
Why hasn't anyone mentioned sage yet? It is quite bloated for a calculator (it's intended to rival Mathematica, not MS Calc), but it does plain old arithmetic, calculus, equation solving, factoring and plotting (2d, 3d, 2d/3d implicit, complex, complex implicit) quite well.
Just get off the lawn, kid. Or, mow it. When we want your opinion, we'll offer you an ice cream.
"Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
Perhaps at first blush, your reaction might seems right. But it only takes the a slight bit of thought to realize that most calculator interfaces, regardless of OS, mimic those of a physical world calculator - that is to say they don't take advantage of the extended output options of a desktop display and require you interact with numbers in the same archaic way as the physical models. A spreadsheet, on the other hand, allows you to keep all kinds of numbers all over the place for quick reference in addition to allowing you to quickly apply similar functions across different sets of numbers or more easily write more complex mathematical equations. Even when you calculator app allows that kind of thing, it's almost always more complicated to learn than its worth, and is way more easily done by just popping open a spreadsheet. As the parent said, anything more complicated than just adding a few numbers; I'm inclined to agree.
Down with the career politician! SUPPORT TERM LIMITS
You are right. Microsoft has gone on to design much more then faulty calculators. Lets move on. Now they design faulty spreadsheets.
The Linux calculator we use at work is gtapecalc: http://gtapecalc.sourceforge.net/
It is oldler, but a great business calculator. The best feature it has is the ability to emulate a calculator WITH A PRINTOUT TAPE! So you can see everything you did, edit those numbers, add comments, even print the "tape".
What more could you need? (Acceptable answer: Sage?)
there is no god but truth, and reality is its prophet
Could someone give an example of a problem where RPN uses fewer strokes than an algebraic order calculator (including what strokes are needed on the RPN)?
One big example is continued fractions. For example : 2 INV 2 + INV 2 + INV 2 + INV 2 +...... approximates the square root of 2.
The algebraic method would involve this unweidly and ugly expression : 1 + 1/(2+1/(2+1/(2+1/(2+1/(......)))))
jdb2
Algebraic: (2 + 4) * (5 + 6)
11 keystrokes
RPN: 2 4 + 5 6 + *
7 keystrokes
My hat's off to you if you can think numerically, but I haven't learned how yet.
My hat's off if you can write an spreadsheet formula without thinking numerically. As fas as I know you can't define functions geometrically in any of the available spreadsheets.
Having a spreadsheet implies a graphic way of organizing/presenting the information, but reasonably numerical skills are always necessary for writing functions.
Also, there is a widely used (some people consider is somewhat of a standard) calculator language called RPL, supported by many handheld calculators and computer software (including GPL alternatives).
- Human knowledge belongs to the world
could you guys give the pointless Microsoft bashing a rest? Just once, ever?
No. Users of Microsoft product have a shared experience. It's no different from that knowing wink when I talk to other Florida residents about Hurricane Andrew. Or comisserate with a Cubs fan. Or talk about the most recent inanities of the most recent PHB with another cubicle dweller. Windows is our shared hell, our Inferno. We could no more stop talking about its pains than we could stop complaining about taxes or the latest government screwup. Indeed, I could holler over my cubicle wall, "Remember Code Red?" or "Just like Nimda" and four people will join in a collective groan of agreement.
By my count:
Algebraic: 2 + 4 = * ( 5 + 6 =
10 keystrokes
RPN: 2 Enter 4 + 5 Enter 6 + *
9 keystrokes
Although it is only a single stroke on this problem, there does seem to be an advantage in keystrokes. I think there would be an additional keystroke saved on each additional sum in parenthesis that you tacked on to the product.
Uh.. the seven best Linux calculators...? Okay, I take it back, can we go back to the Apple news please?
"I like to lick butts!" by MobileTatsu-NJG (#32700246) (Score:5, Informative)
Half the people on this site probably weren't even alive when Windows 3.1 came out... could you guys give the pointless Microsoft bashing a rest? Just once, ever?
Age is not an excuse for ignorance. What's crap it's crap, even time can't change that, also, short memory isn't always a good thing.
I am putting myself to the fullest possible use, which is all I can think that any conscious entity can ever hope to do.
Half the people on this site probably weren't even alive when Windows 3.1 came out... could you guys give the pointless Microsoft bashing a rest? Just once, ever?
Could we maybe just get over it instead of posting another "LOLZ Microsoft BOB is bad guyz!!"
This shit pisses me off.
Except every few years they remind us how much they really suck.
And 3.1 wasn't that bad. Except when you compared it with an Amiga.
But since then they've had Windows ME, and Vista to remind us how much they suck.
If someone is passing you on the right, you are an asshole for driving in the wrong lane.
True, you need a browser to use Sage's GUI, but you certainly mustn't run Mozilla. It works in every reasonably modern browser, including Chrome (despite my opposition to supporting beta browsers) -- hell -- Willam Stein even uses from his iPhone. If you can't get it to run under NoScript... that's because it uses lots of javascript, and you've disabled it. It's like complaining that your car gets bad gas mileage after you let the air out of the tires!
However, I must disagree with your description of Sage as "labyrinthine". It's got gobs of documentation that's easy to find and navigate, and it's a Python, which is ridiculously easy to learn. Furthermore, the community is large, and it's easy to get help, both on irc and over the mailing lists.
(disclaimer -- I'm a Sage developer, and I love the notebook)
One or two others have hinted at this, but I find that RPN just seems much more natural. The fact that you have a stack means that you can attack a problem in almost any order, without really any sacrifice of keystrokes or hacks like the "Ans->" key or memories or whatever.
Want to start on the outside of a big equation and work your way in? No problem - although you'll have to keep track of a few values on the stack (usually not a big deal unless the expression is very unwieldy). Want to start on the inside and work your way out? That is trivial.
When I see people working with normal calculators and they need to capture intermediate values I often see lots of rounding and re-entry. With an RPN calculator I can see the intermediate values, and yet keep them at full precision without any need for memories/etc.
Seeing all the intermediate values often is useful in real-world situations, as well. For example, often you'll run into equations in real life where some value of interest is a sum or product of lots of components (each of which is the result of a short calc). With an RPN calc you just perform each short calc and end up with a stack full of values, and then you hit + or * 10 times or whatever to sum/product the whole list. However, before you do that you can easily look at the list (or just watch the stack collapse and see the values as you use them). This gives you a quick idea of how the various values contribute to the whole.
When I use infix calculators I find myself having to plan ahead a lot more to do a calculation, or writing out big long strings of math. RPN just fits how I think better.
I almost find RPN more natural, but it's too destructive. I'd like to have a calculator that stores the operations tree and lets me modify any part of it. But for everyday use, who uses a calculator app? I just use a system service that evaluates the selected text and appends the result.
I am TheRaven on Soylent News
I was alive when Windows 3 came out and I remember the calculator well, because it didn't fit in with the rest of the environment. Unlike every other app, which had been rewritten to use the new beveled buttons, the calculator used the flat ones from Windows 2 that just flashed black when you clicked on them, rather than having a push effect. Oddly enough, it was not the same calculator that shipped with Windows 2, so someone had tweaked the UI but not thought to upgrade it to the newer controls.
Windows 3.1 and NT 3.x came with the same calculator and it wasn't until Windows 95 that MS updated the UI. The OS X calculator was pretty useless until they added the programmer mode around 10.4 or 10.5. In this mode it will display any number in binary under the main display and let you toggle individual bits by clicking on them. This is amazingly useful when debugging. It also supports RPN.
I am TheRaven on Soylent News
No. Those flaws do say something about Microsoft. Just about any flaw exposed in their products is of the same type: functions accepting outside input without validation. The fact that so many flaws have turned up over the years says outright that you guys are sloppy coders.
Mart
"I know I will be modded down for this": where's the option '-1, Asking for it'?
You're missing the point. You have to enter a space, carriage return, or some other differentiator for the calculator to know that you mean 2 then 4 not 24. This is not necessary in algebraic notation because it can all be run together. That is why s/he counted the ENTER press.
-l
Help cure AIDS, cancer, and more. Donate your unused computer time to worldcommunitygrid.org. Join Team Slashdot!