WP43 News

This area is for discussion about these families of custom high-end Scientific Calculator applications for SwissMicros devices.
User avatar
Jaymos
Posts: 1635
Joined: Sun Nov 04, 2018 7:03 pm
Location: Cape Town

Re: 43S News

Post by Jaymos »

Walter wrote:
Sat Oct 15, 2022 3:46 pm
redglyph wrote:
Sat Oct 15, 2022 12:04 pm
ben.titmus wrote:
Wed Oct 12, 2022 1:08 am
So I'd say: continue suggesting new ideas, but not all of them will be taken.
My gripe is not with a solution being accepted or refused. My problem is a solution that is discarded (or accepted, though it's very unlikely) without even reading any of the arguments.
Be sure your arguments are being read - though sometimes not all of them, if the first is so far off (IMO) that I feel challenged to respond to the first already. I can't guarantee I comprehend always what you meant, however (1st theorem of communication: A message is not what the sender sends but what the receiver gets). So if it seems I didn't get what you meant (or didn't read your message properly), please check and rephrase and try once more. And if you refer to older posts, please include links to them (or it may well be I don't remember).
I think I am qualified to answer on this sub-thread. I can talk for a long time on this, but I need not. And as a contributor who started 3 years ago on this very thread, I have first hand knowledge of this process.

It will suffice to say that if you try hard enough with facts and not emotions (in fact ignore those for a while), that you can get through to change the spec. It is not easy. But the result is satisfying. The process makes you continue to do it only if you really feel it is needed. Sometimes that is not pleasant. And be warned that if you do succeed to have the spec changed, the spec is just that - it is not automatically implemented to be blunt, and it will help if you add your own resources to the open source project to implement the bit you got agreement to change.

I found that if you have a vision, sometimes you need to be pro-active and make a demo in code or in a graphic or in a series of graphics, because as usual, a picture is worth a lot more. My opinion is that (a software) spec can still change even after a final product is out the door, whenever that may be. If you saw something the team did not see or understand at the time, I will bet my bottom dollar if you get them to understand the problem they will change if it is valid and worth it. But do understand for every apparent small change you want, there may be countless repercussions in the program that you will only know once you study the code. Also understand some you won't win even if you think you understand everything, it may simply not fit into the now or future project plan.

In that case, if you are not happy, roll you own. I was sure that I used this expression before and a quick search gives this: My 2019 post, where the two main co-contributors to the other project both are batting ideas back and forth. See "roll your own" used here: viewtopic.php?f=2&t=2216&p=11348&hilit= ... own#p11348

Either way, do not dismiss the quoted post from Walter above. It contains many truths.
Jaco Mostert
Elec Eng, South Africa
https://47calc.com C47 (s/n 03818 & 06199), WP43 (0015). In box: HP42S, HP32Sii, WP34S&C, HP28C, HP35s, EL-506P, EL-W506, PB700; ex: FX702P, 11C, HP67 & HP85; iOS: 42s Byron, Free42+, WP31S/34S, HCalc.
ben.titmus
Posts: 49
Joined: Wed Feb 24, 2021 7:50 pm
Location: Cambridge, UK

Re: 43S News

Post by ben.titmus »

Jaymos wrote:
Sun Oct 16, 2022 3:14 pm
And be warned that if you do succeed to have the spec changed, the spec is just that - it is not automatically implemented to be blunt, and it will help if you add your own resources to the open source project to implement the bit you got agreement to change.
This is true, and part of the difficulty with open source projects. Unless someone else really cares about your feature, it's unlikely they'll care enough to implement it. Having said that, we have already made many changes to the code due to changing specs as a result of discussions on this forum. So they firmware eventually moves closer to the spec.
Jaymos wrote:
Sun Oct 16, 2022 3:14 pm
My opinion is that (a software) spec can still change even after a final product is out the door, whenever that may be.
There are very few things that can't change. These are mostly the printing on the physical calculator which is now finalised and very unlikely to change. All of the operations of the calculator, including what key presses might do and what is displayed on the screen, can change.
Jaymos wrote:
Sun Oct 16, 2022 3:14 pm
If you saw something the team did not see or understand at the time, I will bet my bottom dollar if you get them to understand the problem they will change if it is valid and worth it.
Absolutely. We all want to produce the best calculator we can.
Jaymos wrote:
Sun Oct 16, 2022 3:14 pm
But do understand for every apparent small change you want, there may be countless repercussions in the program that you will only know once you study the code.
It's not just the code (although that is true). Sometimes it's only when we start to implement something that it becomes obvious what won't work, or what else we need to consider. So many features turn out to be a lot more complicated (or underspecified) when they are first implemented.
redglyph
Posts: 177
Joined: Sat Dec 22, 2018 11:45 am

Re: 43S News

Post by redglyph »

Jaymos wrote:
Sun Oct 16, 2022 3:14 pm
I found that if you have a vision, sometimes you need to be pro-active and make a demo in code or in a graphic or in a series of graphics, because as usual, a picture is worth a lot more. My opinion is that (a software) spec can still change even after a final product is out the door, whenever that may be. If you saw something the team did not see or understand at the time, I will bet my bottom dollar if you get them to understand the problem they will change if it is valid and worth it.
Agreed, anything to illustrate an issue helps, if you remember that's what I did, you thought it was a valid suggestion and we exchanged a few ideas with interesting inputs from your part. Unfortunately he just had a brief look at the last image without reading the first post and used a few arguments that were specifically addressed in the first post, which makes it hard to have any coherent discussion and not very motivating to present everything the best way possible when it's ignored. I did try to repeat the arguments but without any response so I can only conclude they were not read either, but there were other posts on other topics.

Another example, I searched where the key layout had been discussed before to avoid any repetition of an earlier attempt, but it was just impossible to find...

This happened on a few other occasions, so I gave up and can't be bothered with these specific issues anymore, but maybe this problem can be spared to others in the future:

Hopefully this shows that making everything in a single thread is not ideal, no matter how carefully a new topic is presented. That's why I think those suggestions and bug reports are safer in a thread of their own, to structure the process and avoid the temptation of only reading the last post and drawing the wrong conclusions in a thread counting 191 pages (!) of interleaved topics.

I believe that's how a few of you work anyway, by opening new issues on GitLab and copying what is found here; wherever I worked, it has always been organized around similar tools too. At the very least, you'd all benefit from a WP43 sub-forum to make the discussions easier.
User avatar
Walter
Posts: 3070
Joined: Tue May 02, 2017 11:13 am
Location: On a mission close to DRS, Germany

Re: 43S News

Post by Walter »

Don't cry for me, Argentina...

We've got more than one thread for the 43S and various topics. And if you think or feel another thread being necessary or beneficial or even useful then start one - here's no thread opening authority you've to ask before or wait for.

I won't repeat my recommendations given above more than once. But remember Gorbachev as well: Who comes late will be punished by life.
WP43 SN00000, 34S, and 31S for obvious reasons; HP-35, 45, ..., 35S, 15CE, DM16L S/N# 00093, DM42β SN:00041
H2X
Posts: 885
Joined: Tue Apr 25, 2017 8:00 am
Location: Norðvegr
Contact:

Re: 43S News

Post by H2X »

redglyph wrote:
Mon Oct 17, 2022 10:12 am
... a thread counting 191 pages (!) of interleaved topics.
I'm afraid you have to blame the rest of us for that.
What is the metric tensor in imperial units?
ben.titmus
Posts: 49
Joined: Wed Feb 24, 2021 7:50 pm
Location: Cambridge, UK

Re: 43S News

Post by ben.titmus »

redglyph wrote:
Mon Oct 17, 2022 10:12 am
... I did try to repeat the arguments but without any response so I can only conclude they were not read either, but there were other posts on other topics.
The WP43 team greatly appreciate suggestions and bug reports. However, it can be difficult to keep track of all the suggestions and comments. The burden of convincing the team lies with the person making the suggestion. Notice that some suggestions have been picked up really quickly and implemented. Mostly these suggestions are things that are not controversial and easy to understand and implement. Anything that's more complicated or different from what we currently have will take more time and more convincing.
redglyph wrote:
Mon Oct 17, 2022 10:12 am
Another example, I searched where the key layout had been discussed before to avoid any repetition of an earlier attempt, but it was just impossible to find...
Key layouts in general have been discussed over and over again on the GitLab page and on this forum. It is difficult to find these discussions though. In reality the key layout is not going to change now. Anything about the physical calculator is now fixed and would be difficult to change without very good reason. Anything that's firmware related can still be easily changed.
redglyph wrote:
Mon Oct 17, 2022 10:12 am
Hopefully this shows that making everything in a single thread is not ideal, no matter how carefully a new topic is presented. ...

I believe that's how a few of you work anyway, by opening new issues on GitLab and copying what is found here; wherever I worked, it has always been organized around similar tools too.
You can start your own thread here (as Walter said). You can open an issue on the GitLab page - nothing is preventing anyone doing this. I much prefer GitLab issues because the issue can be discussed in its own thread and issues can reference other issues and code commits. However, many of us monitor these forums and frequently create new issues based on comments (suggestions and bug reports) in the forums. Whatever is convenient to the situation and users really.
redglyph
Posts: 177
Joined: Sat Dec 22, 2018 11:45 am

Re: 43S News

Post by redglyph »

H2X wrote:
Mon Oct 17, 2022 7:45 pm
I'm afraid you have to blame the rest of us for that.
Agreed, we're all in this together :D
Well, to be fair it's a very good format for general discussion.
redglyph
Posts: 177
Joined: Sat Dec 22, 2018 11:45 am

Re: 43S News

Post by redglyph »

ben.titmus wrote:
Mon Oct 17, 2022 10:31 pm
The WP43 team greatly appreciate suggestions and bug reports. However, it can be difficult to keep track of all the suggestions and comments. The burden of convincing the team lies with the person making the suggestion. Notice that some suggestions have been picked up really quickly and implemented. Mostly these suggestions are things that are not controversial and easy to understand and implement. Anything that's more complicated or different from what we currently have will take more time and more convincing.
I appreciate it's difficult to keep track, I've been there. That's why some tricks like dedicated threads, or better, issues in GitHub (or GitLab I think - I don't know it well) are more appropriate. People would need a login there for the latter though, so forums are easier for many users indeed.

I would have created a thread, but there's no dedicated sub-forum and we are invited to ask the questions and post the suggestions here (or report bugs in the other thread), so I chose to do as everyone else to keep the same format.
ben.titmus wrote:
Mon Oct 17, 2022 10:31 pm
Key layouts in general have been discussed over and over again on the GitLab page and on this forum. It is difficult to find these discussions though. In reality the key layout is not going to change now. Anything about the physical calculator is now fixed and would be difficult to change without very good reason. Anything that's firmware related can still be easily changed.
I wasn't told so even after proposing a first slight change (quite the contrary, "try again"...), but it makes sense and that's what I deduced from the lack of interest. It's sad, considering there are still free labels for dearly missing operations and some inconsistencies but nothing is perfect. As last resort there's still the user mode. :)
gmac42
Posts: 103
Joined: Fri Jun 01, 2018 11:30 am

Re: 43S News

Post by gmac42 »

redglyph wrote:
Tue Oct 18, 2022 11:23 am
I appreciate it's difficult to keep track, I've been there. That's why some tricks like dedicated threads, or better, issues in GitHub (or GitLab I think - I don't know it well) are more appropriate. People would need a login there for the latter though, so forums are easier for many users indeed.
They need a login for the forum too, right? (Or can you post anonymously here? I honestly never checked.)
DM41X #542, DM42 #650, DM41L #801, HP 41CX, HP 41CV, HP 50G, HP11C, TI 89
H2X
Posts: 885
Joined: Tue Apr 25, 2017 8:00 am
Location: Norðvegr
Contact:

Re: 43S News

Post by H2X »

I say this with the benefit of hindsight:

It's evident that the WP43S mission was clear from the start, and the documentation was pretty darn close to done. They had their plan, their Big Design Up Front. Classic waterfall, and it has served them - and will be serving us - well.

That's a rare bird nowadays, and quite different from many other open source projects we might we used to.
Last edited by H2X on Tue Oct 18, 2022 3:27 pm, edited 1 time in total.
What is the metric tensor in imperial units?
Post Reply