Once the hardware design is settled, I would be happy to buy one, even though the SW wasn’t 100% done, and accept SW updates drizzling in along the way.
/Rudi
DM-42 (s/n 06999), HP-42S, HP-35s, HP-11c, HP-32SII (ex HP-41CV, ex HP-75C, ex HP-48G + a lot, really lot of a accessories)
Denmark
Once the hardware design is settled, I would be happy to buy one, even though the SW wasn’t 100% done, and accept SW updates drizzling in along the way.
Many among us are ready to, since - at least - ten years.
Greetings, Massimo ajcaton -+×÷left is right and right is wrongCasted in gold
... Once the hardware design is settled, I would be happy to buy one, even though the SW wasn’t 100% done, and accept SW updates drizzling in along the way.
Many among us are ready to, since - at least - ten years.
As every hobbyist's project, it subsists on its active contributors. If only 10% of those who are longing for a 43S would dedicate some work to it on a fairly regular basis, the project would accelerate significantly. Woosh!
But, alas, real life is deviating...
WP43 SN00000, 34S, and 31S for obvious reasons; HP-35, 45, ..., 35S, 15CE, DM16L S/N# 00093, DM42β SN:00041
... Once the hardware design is settled, I would be happy to buy one, even though the SW wasn’t 100% done, and accept SW updates drizzling in along the way.
Many among us are ready to, since - at least - ten years.
As every hobbyist's project, it subsists on its active contributors. If only 10% of those who are longing for a 43S would dedicate some work to it on a fairly regular basis, the project would accelerate significantly. Woosh!
But, alas, real life is deviating...
My comment was only meant on a positive tune, as to say that many are waiting to play with your latest work of art, after enjoying the previous one.
But, alas, you always love quarreling...
Greetings, Massimo ajcaton -+×÷left is right and right is wrongCasted in gold
Many among us are ready to [buy a 43S], since - at least - ten years.
As every hobbyist's project, it subsists on its active contributors. If only 10% of those who are longing for a 43S would dedicate some work to it on a fairly regular basis, the project would accelerate significantly. Woosh!
But, alas, real life is deviating...
My comment was only meant on a positive tune, as to say that many are waiting to play with your latest work of art, after enjoying the previous one.
But, alas, you always love quarreling...
The meaning of a message is not what the sender has meant but what the receiver perceives (communication theorem).
In view of the occasion, I just repeated some project management verities - and you think that's quarreling. Please calibrate.
WP43 SN00000, 34S, and 31S for obvious reasons; HP-35, 45, ..., 35S, 15CE, DM16L S/N# 00093, DM42β SN:00041
I prefer (a). Actually, I wonder about the practicality of implementing something like a format string. Something that can take 2.936 in the X register and display it as £3/1/7+3⁄4
Preference recorded.
I don't comprehend your last sentence though. Please elaborate. TIA
Right, well it's reasonable to assume that an advanced fractional capability would support the Carolingian currency system. Therefore:
The format string provides the means to specify the required ratios.The convention that immediately presents itself is that 1 indicates the units position. So, in this case, the format should be "%1:20:12:4R".
However, we also need to address interpolation of separators, so we follow the convention that the print list is implicitly expanded. The %R format is followed by "%d/%d/%d"
The + and subsequent is only required if there are fractional pence (farthings or ha'pennies), so the format needs to indicate the start of the positive constraint. We'll use "%+C+", with the first + indicating that the constraint is positive.
The fractional pence should be displayed as a simplified fraction, so "%SF".
Finally, since a currency symbol is displayed, conversions are necessary. The original example assumed that the user was gentle bred, so the value in the X register is necessarily in guineas (and must be multiplied by 1.05 before being displayed as pounds). Format string: "%[GBP]U£"
Putting this all together, we have "%[GBP]U£%1:20:12:4R%d/%d/%d%+C+%SF". Needless to say, the first calculator that implements this capability will clearly have earned the right to be considered remarkable.
I prefer (a). Actually, I wonder about the practicality of implementing something like a format string. Something that can take 2.936 in the X register and display it as £3/1/7+3⁄4
... I don't comprehend your last sentence though. Please elaborate. TIA
... well it's reasonable to assume that an advanced fractional capability would support the Carolingian currency system.
Some remarks:
AFAIK we never spoke about 'an advanced fractional capability'. Fraction-wise, we support what the WP34S does.
The 'Carolingian currency system' sounds to me like some 1200 years ago. I'm afraid that's beyond our scope creating a calculator for (today's) science and engineering. FYI, this calculator is loaded with irrational (non-SI) units already...
Unless you've better arguments that outdated system won't make it into our 43S. I'm sorry and hope for your understanding.
WP43 SN00000, 34S, and 31S for obvious reasons; HP-35, 45, ..., 35S, 15CE, DM16L S/N# 00093, DM42β SN:00041
Perhaps a missing VARMNU ? (And writing 5 where you meant 6 or vice versa?)
The program seems correct to me, it implements x * (x^5 - 1) - 1; one enter should suffice though.
Robbert Jan, MSEE, RPN user since 1976 and a collector for many years I now own all the important ones: HP-35, 45, 55, 65, 97, 19, 21, 25, 34, 10-16, 41, 42, 71, 48, 50, Prime, DM41, DM42, WP43, C47, R47; Project 47 team member https://47calc.com