[KDE Dot News]
 faq
 flatforty
 contribute
 subscribe
 configure
 search
 rdf
 main
 parent
 thread


Re: Classic difference
by Roberto Alsina on Monday 27/Sep/2004, @16:41
I am sure you can calculate 20% of 75 plus 15% of 64 faster using your calculator, right?

I mean, .2*75+.15*64(enter) is so much slower than .2*75(push into mem).15*64+(pop from mem)= :-)

For each approach used to interface the calculator, there is some set of problems that are slower. My own guess (and nothing more than that) is that this approach is faster for a significant set of problems.
  Related Links
 ·   Articles on KDE Advocacy, Discussions, and Rumors
 ·   Also by Roberto Alsina
 ·   Contact author

Thread Threshold:

The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whomever posted them.
( Reply )

RPN
by Rich Jones on Tuesday 28/Sep/2004, @02:55
.. And this is where an rpn interface would shine.
.2 [enter] 75 [*] .15 [enter] 64 [*] [+]
You get to see intermediate results, and get to enter in the order written, evaluating as you go. The only practical problem with the RPN approach is stack height, but that's not a problem with a calculator based on a computer, with kaboodles of memory.

PGCalc2 lets you enter number and operators directly from the numpad, and use the mouse for things like SIN.
[ Reply To This | View ]
  • Re: RPN
    by Chanan Oren on Sunday 03/Oct/2004, @19:10
    You don't need to use the mouse for things like SIN, just press it's letter. S for SIN, T for COS, U for TAN, etc. Also CTRL, ESC to quit or SHIFT, ESC to minimize to the tray.
    [ Reply To This | View ]
Re: Classic difference
by David Walser on Tuesday 28/Sep/2004, @03:02
The example you gave should take the exact same keystrokes actually, so no advantage either way there. With other problems, *nothing* will be faster with a usecalc/graphing calculator interface if you know what you are doing.
[ Reply To This | View ]
  • Re: Classic difference
    by Roberto Alsina on Tuesday 28/Sep/2004, @03:55
    Sorry, but I can't parse your post. Are you saying that with other problems a scientific calculator will be faster, or that a graphig calculator is never faster?
    [ Reply To This | View ]
Re: Classic difference
by ScottZ on Tuesday 28/Sep/2004, @05:53
This reminds me of a feature that I would like to see on all history/tape calculators. I wish that they would include the calculation next to the answer.
When all you see is the answer it can be hard to remember which calculation created the answer.
[ Reply To This | View ]
The Fine Print: The previous comments are owned by whomever posted them.
( Reply )
  "I switch between vi and xemacs quite a lot. I'm happy with both." -- Simon Hausmann
KDE®, "K Desktop Environment", "KDE Dot News", "got the dot?" and the KDE Logo® are trademarks or registered trademarks of KDE e.V. in the European Union, the United States and other countries. All other trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners. Comments are owned by the poster. The rest: Copyright © 2000-2008 KDE e.V. for The KDE Project. For further information or comments on this site, please contact the Webmaster.
[ home | post article | flat forty | subscribe | search | rdf ]