| ▲ | wolvoleo 3 hours ago | ||||||||||||||||
I would love a programmers' calculator but I really hate RPN. I wish they would make one without it. Back in the day they did it for efficiency. But that's no longer an issue these days. I do still have a mint HP48GX but never use it for the same reason. The successor the 49 had normal math as an option but it was not as iconic. | |||||||||||||||||
| ▲ | kstrauser 3 hours ago | parent | next [-] | ||||||||||||||||
RPN felt so weird and alien to me, and then one day I felt my brain pivot, and now it's the only method I can bear. RPN isn't just more efficient for the calculator to process. I mean, it is, but that's not the selling point. It's way more efficient to use. It requires the least number of keystrokes necessary to enter a formula, and never requires parentheses for grouping. You can start at the innermost nested, hairy bits of a formula, then quickly work your way outward. That's the part I love and would hate to be without. | |||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||
| ▲ | wkjagt 20 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-] | ||||||||||||||||
I felt the same and got a Casio CM-100 that has similar functionality. Not as nice as the HP but it does the job. Much cheaper too if you can find one. | |||||||||||||||||
| ▲ | gdelfino01 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | ||||||||||||||||
I absolutely love my HP48SX and HP48GX (I have both) and the RPN is what I like the most. But if you don't like RPN, just type a regular expression between simple quotes and evaluate it. | |||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||
| ▲ | NetMageSCW 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | ||||||||||||||||
They did it for user efficiency, not machine efficiency. And it is still better today for hand calculation. | |||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||