Page 2 of 7

Re: DM 48 .... WHY NOT ?!!!

Posted: Wed May 09, 2018 11:42 am
by Krauts In Space
Some aspects of the RPNs appear not logic to me: flags and registers.
SF 01 or STO 99 should be notated as 1 SF or 99 STO. This would need a fifth stack level to keep the four level stack as we know it.
But for the rest i'm happy with the small calculators.

Re: DM 48 .... WHY NOT ?!!!

Posted: Wed May 09, 2018 11:48 am
by Walter
Krauts In Space wrote:
Wed May 09, 2018 11:42 am
Some aspects of the RPNs appear not logic to me: flags and registers.
SF 01 or STO 99 should be notated as 1 SF or 99 STO.
That's a matter of getting used to it -- I've got the opposite problem with RPL (99 STO should be notated as STO 99) ;)

Re: DM 48 .... WHY NOT ?!!!

Posted: Wed May 09, 2018 12:10 pm
by Krauts In Space
Walter wrote:
Wed May 09, 2018 11:48 am
Krauts In Space wrote:
Wed May 09, 2018 11:42 am
Some aspects of the RPNs appear not logic to me: flags and registers.
SF 01 or STO 99 should be notated as 1 SF or 99 STO.
That's a matter of getting used to it -- I've got the opposite problem with RPL (99 STO should be notated as STO 99) ;)
Sure it is, and after approx 35 years I think I am ;)
On the other hand storing a number in a register is much easier and quicker with 123 sto 45 than 123 enter 45 sto
B)
To me the RPNs are "plumbers pliers". They are "rough". You better don't show your code to any structured programming guy. Don't ask for readability without thorough documentation after one year (if that long), if your code gets larger, for instance to calculate cost proposals. But you can code q'n'd.

Re: DM 48 .... WHY NOT ?!!!

Posted: Wed May 09, 2018 1:28 pm
by rprosperi
Krauts In Space wrote:
Wed May 09, 2018 12:10 pm
Don't ask for [RPN] readability without thorough documentation after one year (if that long), if your code gets larger, for instance to calculate cost proposals. But you can code q'n'd.
While this is true, in the case of RPL it's more like one week... :lol:

Still, I like them both.

Re: DM 48 .... WHY NOT ?!!!

Posted: Wed May 09, 2018 2:03 pm
by Krauts In Space
rprosperi wrote:
Wed May 09, 2018 1:28 pm
Krauts In Space wrote:
Wed May 09, 2018 12:10 pm
Don't ask for [RPN] readability without thorough documentation after one year (if that long), if your code gets larger, for instance to calculate cost proposals. But you can code q'n'd.
While this is true, in the case of RPL it's more like one week... :lol:

Still, I like them both.
Boy ... and I would've problems reading my latest code after some days without extensive documentation. :lol:

Re: DM 48 .... WHY NOT ?!!!

Posted: Wed May 09, 2018 6:05 pm
by akaTB
Krauts In Space wrote:
Wed May 09, 2018 12:10 pm

On the other hand storing a number in a register is much easier and quicker with 123 sto 45 than 123 enter 45 sto
B)
Since RPL likes to take it to the limit, I'd prefer coding it like: 321 [RETNE] 54 [OTS]

:lol:

Re: DM 48 .... WHY NOT ?!!!

Posted: Sun Jul 15, 2018 8:03 pm
by CalcFreak
I'm firmly in the "Do it," camp. I'm hoping Swiss Micros is secretly navigating the issues needed to bring a 48GX clone to market. ;)

Judging by the amount of used HP 48GX units (many with dark LCD panels) changing hands on eBay, I believe this product would be a big seller. I'm in for a couple.

Re: DM 48 .... WHY NOT ?!!!

Posted: Sun Jul 15, 2018 8:07 pm
by Michael
CalcFreak wrote:
Sun Jul 15, 2018 8:03 pm
I'm firmly in the "Do it," camp...
So am I 8-)

Re: DM 48 .... WHY NOT ?!!!

Posted: Wed Aug 22, 2018 2:29 am
by ABridges
It shouldn't be a holy war, it is an evolution. Whatever you prefer it's hard to argue that RPL isn't a better way of doing things. I'd buy a DM48, a DM28, or something with a lot less functionality as long as it ran RPL, I could program it, and manipulate strings with it. I don't need another computer, I just need a calculator that works alongside my laziness, forgetfulness and general sloppiness. My 28S did, I wish it still worked.

I think a cut-down RPL machine based on the DM42 hardware is a great idea.

Re: DM 48 .... WHY NOT ?!!!

Posted: Wed Aug 22, 2018 6:38 am
by akaTB
ABridges wrote:
Wed Aug 22, 2018 2:29 am
It shouldn't be a holy war,
You're wrong: it is.

And it's not evolution, but evilution.
:lol: