
NavList:
A Community Devoted to the Preservation and Practice of Celestial Navigation and Other Methods of Traditional Wayfinding
Re: Calculators revisited (TI-86, HP 48gx)
From: Geoff Kuenning
Date: 2000 Dec 09, 4:15 AM
From: Geoff Kuenning
Date: 2000 Dec 09, 4:15 AM
I heartily agree with Dan in general, but my experience leads me to one caveat. Back before computers were affordable to the common man, I did a *lot* of programming on my trusty new HP-41C (which is now my trusty OLD 41C). I have found that, at least for my mind, RPN is the perfect notation for ad-hoc calculations, but it is much less handy for writing complicated programs. The problem is that when you are writing a long program, it is very difficult to keep track of what is on the stack. When I wrote for the 41C, I would often use a piece of scratch paper to keep track of the stack layout. Nowadays when I write Postscript (see, for example, the Postscript plotting sheet available from my Web site) I often use comments to keep track of the stack. I don't have same problem when writing code in languages like C and C++, where the notation is algebraic. My conclusion is that (for me) RPN is best for ad-hoc calculations, but algebraic notations are more convenient for programming. I also suppose I should mentionk, for what it's worth, that programming is both my profession and my life (and has been for over 30 years). Not intended as a brag, just an indication of my mindset. YMMV. -- Geoff Kuenning geoff@cs.hmc.edu http://www.cs.hmc.edu/~geoff/ The most exciting phrase to hear in science, the one that heralds new discoveries, is not "Eureka!" (I found it!) but "That's funny ..." -- Isaac Asimov