DM 48 .... WHY NOT ?!!!

General discussion about calculators, Swiss Micros or otherwise
Krauts In Space
Posts: 85
Joined: Wed Jan 03, 2018 2:48 pm
Location: Nuremberg, Germany

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

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.
DM15L S/# 10584 FW v25
DM42 S/# 01015 FW v3.5

Walter
Posts: 1003
Joined: Tue May 02, 2017 9:13 am
Location: Close to FRA, Germany

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

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)
DM42 SN: 00041 --- Follower of Platon.

HP-35, HP-45, ..., HP-50, WP 34S, WP 31S, DM16L

Krauts In Space
Posts: 85
Joined: Wed Jan 03, 2018 2:48 pm
Location: Nuremberg, Germany

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

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.
DM15L S/# 10584 FW v25
DM42 S/# 01015 FW v3.5

rprosperi
Posts: 479
Joined: Mon Apr 24, 2017 5:48 pm
Location: New York

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

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...

Still, I like them both.
--bob p

DM42: β00071 & 00282

Krauts In Space
Posts: 85
Joined: Wed Jan 03, 2018 2:48 pm
Location: Nuremberg, Germany

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

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...

Still, I like them both.
Boy ... and I would've problems reading my latest code after some days without extensive documentation.
DM15L S/# 10584 FW v25
DM42 S/# 01015 FW v3.5

akaTB
Posts: 271
Joined: Tue May 02, 2017 11:56 am

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

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]

Greetings,
Massimo

-+×÷left is right and right is wrong

CalcFreak
Posts: 4
Joined: Tue Apr 24, 2018 6:42 am

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

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.

Michael
Posts: 236
Joined: Wed Apr 05, 2017 9:31 pm

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

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

ABridges
Posts: 3
Joined: Tue Aug 21, 2018 9:53 pm

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

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.
DM42 SN: 00226
65, 34C, 41CV, 15C, 28S, 42S, 48S, 49G, WP34S. Probably enough

akaTB
Posts: 271
Joined: Tue May 02, 2017 11:56 am

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

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.
Greetings,
Massimo

-+×÷left is right and right is wrong