20 Mar
2020
20 Mar
'20
11:15 p.m.
Sorry to flog this topic, but the two examples below are an
unfair comparison. What happened to the multiplications in the
second? And two of the [enter]s in the first are unnecessary.
Ironically three of the four operations in the second are
actually reverse Polish! If you had to utter sqrt first,
as we do on paper and in speech, things wouldn't look so great.
[a] [enter]
[a] [enter]
[multiply]
[b] [enter]
[b] [enter]
[multiply]
[add]
[square root]
[a]
[square]
[plus]
[b]
[square]
[square root]
Doug
21 Mar
21 Mar
12:40 a.m.
New subject: RPN (was The most surprising Unix programs)
Oh, flog away.
RPN works for me because the thing on the screen is usually the value
so far. I get to think about what to do with what I've got in my hand.
Equation-driven expression doesn't flow like that. As a calculator, as
opposed to an equation evaluator, it's RPN for me.
-rob
12:43 a.m.
New subject: RPN (was The most surprising Unix programs)
On 3/20/20 5:15 PM, Doug McIlroy wrote:
Sorry to flog this topic, but the two examples below
are an unfair
comparison. What happened to the multiplications in the second?
Are you referring to the second {a,b} and the subsequent multiply? (I'm
presuming so until corrected otherwise.) I think that is addressed by
the square operation.
And two of the [enter]s in the first are unnecessary.
Which two? The enter before the multiplies?
Seeing as how I'm trying to learn from the collective experience of
TUHS, would you please elaborate or reproduce what you believe to be the
correct key sequences?
Ironically three of the four operations in the second
are actually
reverse Polish! If you had to utter sqrt first, as we do on paper
and in speech, things wouldn't look so great.
Hum.... :-/
--
Grant. . . .
unix || die
1500
days inactive
1501
days old
2 comments
3 participants
participants (3)
-
Doug McIlroy -
Grant Taylor -
Rob Pike