Is the HP 50g the last RPN calculator?

[Eddie W. Shore]

Is the HP 50g the last RPN (RPL) calculator produced by HP? I hope not.

How long has it been for the 50g been out of production?

I feel old.

[Gene]

Last *new* model produced? maybe

The 12c and 12cp are still being made. :-)

[Jlouis]

Don't forget that the Prime has RPN in home environment.

And HP 35s is still in production, I think.

HP 12C.

RPN in like Elvis. Will never die.

[Eddie W. Shore]

(09-22-2018 10:37 PM)Gene Wrote:  Last *new* model produced? maybe

The 12c and 12cp are still being made. :-)

You right, I completely forgot about the 12C. I would like to see the 11C or 15C make a comeback.

[Gene]

Yeah, but the 15c made a comeback a couple of years ago. While it is a great collector item, I suspect (my guess) that it was a distraction to the HP group in total, causing them more headaches than it was worth in profit.

Fortunately, we have Swiss Micros models which are pretty amazingly close in many respects.

[burkhard]

(09-22-2018 10:46 PM)Eddie W. Shore Wrote:  

(09-22-2018 10:37 PM)Gene Wrote:  Last *new* model produced? maybe

The 12c and 12cp are still being made. :-)

You right, I completely forgot about the 12C. I would like to see the 11C or 15C make a comeback.

And the current ARM 12C could easily be reflashed to any of the Voyagers, as they did in 2011 when they made the 15C LE.

I have an 11C that my dad gave me out of his stash (along with his 1972 HP35). The 11C I've never played with, though, as I have always owned a 15C myself. Does an 11C have any advantage over a 15C other than price? In college (engineering, 1984-1988, my peers typically had either an 11C or a 15C, but I always considered an 11C a slightly cut-down 15C. Maybe I'm wrong?

A 16C reboot would be nice... small volume though! The 15C is probably the safest bet.

[rprosperi]

(09-23-2018 12:19 AM)burkhard Wrote:  I have an 11C that my dad gave me out of his stash (along with his 1972 HP35). The 11C I've never played with, though, as I have always owned a 15C myself. Does an 11C have any advantage over a 15C other than price? In college (engineering, 1984-1988, my peers typically had either an 11C or a 15C, but I always considered an 11C a slightly cut-down 15C. Maybe I'm wrong?

The 11C offers nothing that isn't the same or better in a 15C, so no need to dabble with it. The only advantage of an 11C, today, is they are much cheaper than a 15C, and if you don't need Complex or Matrix support, Solver or Integration, then 11C is the way to go. But what sensible person that is seriously considering these machines could conclude they will never need those functions? Which is why 15C's cost more...

[Valentin Albillo]

burkhard Wrote:Does an 11C have any advantage over a 15C other than price?

No. But it's cute, kinda "little bro". And quite capable as well, extra-challenging.

Quote:I always considered an 11C a slightly cut-down 15C. Maybe I'm wrong?

No, you're right but "slightly" is not the word, more like "heavily". That said, I own several 11C and love them, they're extremely durable and reliable even in the harshest environments (think Sahara desert-like, literally, extreme heat, sand, dust, ...). I know because I took one with me back in 1981 and still works as new.

Have a nice weekend.
V.
.

[cyrille de brébisson]

Hello,

What about the 20 and 30b? They were created after the 50g...
And they are RPN (while the 50G is RPL!)

Cyrille

[Jlouis]

(09-24-2018 12:33 PM)cyrille de brébisson Wrote:  Hello,

What about the 20 and 30b? They were created after the 50g...
And they are RPN (while the 50G is RPL!)

Cyrille

20 and 30b are not in production anymore, and so is the 50G.

The OP asked for calculators with RPN still in production, or so I understand it.

And the 50G is RPN, as it uses it for entry numbers, as a postfix calculator. RPL is a programming language, IMHO.

But who am I to debate with a guru like Cyrille de Brebisson? In other thread I was advised to no start it again, so, nevermind.

Cheers

JL

[ijabbott]

It all hinges on what Eddie means by "last [...] produced". It could mean any of:

1. the last model with feature X introduced into production;
2. the last model with feature X introduced into production that remains in production; or
3. the model(s) with feature X that remain in production, if any, otherwise the last model(s) with feature X to cease production.
   

Also, do reboots such as HP-12C Platinum count as a new model?

[grsbanks]

(09-24-2018 05:13 PM)Jlouis Wrote:  And the 50G is RPN, as it uses it for entry numbers, as a postfix calculator. RPL is a programming language, IMHO.

But RPL also affects how manual operations are performed. RPN is mostly postfix but operations such as "STO 00" and "SF 00" go against that.

By contrast, RPL machines are purely postfix: << 'VAR' STO >> or << 0 SF >>

I would therefore posit that there is a difference between them and that the 50g is indeed an RPL machine and not RPN.

[Vtile]

Nah. 48/50g is RPN as is the HP35 or hp 9300 (number might be of I mean the first HP desk calc with 3-level stack) Besided every RPN machines have prefix or infix structures.

The programming differs slightly, but not much. The most obvious is objects and branch constructs in RPL. Compared to purely numerical and jump based RPN sequences.

[3298]

Purely postfix? Nope.
There are commands that take parameters from the runstream. In SysRPL they are everywhere, in UserRPL they are relatively rare but still present. The most obvious UserRPL examples are FOR (takes a local variable name after it which is used as loop counter storage) and -> (takes as many local variable names as it can get, and creates local variables with these names and values from the stack). There are some other less obvious examples like the command inserted by the UserRPL compiler when it encounters a quoted name (as opposed to an unquoted one, which would try to recall and execute the variable's contents): this command takes the object after it (i.e. the variable name) and puts it on the stack. That's how UserRPL arranges for quoted names to get put on the stack without getting evaluated.
In a broader sense, many of the control flow commands in UserRPL could be described as taking parameters from the runstream: for example, THEN takes the two objects after it and discards them (that is, it skips them), if the number it has taken from the stack is not equal to 0 (the first object is the code block up to the corresponding ELSE, or if that is not present, up to the corresponding END, wrapped by the compiler into a program using invisible delimiters; the second one is the ELSE or END itself).

So that argument doesn't work. Besides, using "purely postfix" as a criterion for not being RPN (Reverse Polish Notation, a.k.a postfix notation) is a bit awkward, don't you think?
It is a bit unfortunate that the programming language of HP's keystroke-programmable RPN calculators is often also called RPN (does it even have an official name?), but I guess it's too late to fix that.

[Craig Bladow]

(09-24-2018 09:54 PM)3298 Wrote:  It is a bit unfortunate that the programming language of HP's keystroke-programmable RPN calculators is often also called RPN (does it even have an official name?), but I guess it's too late to fix that.

I have seen the HP-41 programming language referred to as ‘FOCAL’ which, according to Wikipedia means FOrty-One CAlculator Language”.

[Jlouis]

Me thinks that the language of the HP keystroke programmable calculators is.............

Keystroke programming?

[Jlouis]

(09-24-2018 09:03 PM)Vtile Wrote:  Nah. 48/50g is RPN as is the HP35 or hp 9300 (number might be of I mean the first HP desk calc with 3-level stack) Besided every RPN machines have prefix or infix structures.

The programming differs slightly, but not much. The most obvious is objects and branch constructs in RPL. Compared to purely numerical and jump based RPN sequences.

Vtile for president!!

[Joe Horn]

What's this silliness about the 50g not being RPN? Here are two reasons why it *is* RPN, in my famously humble opinion.

(1) Press [MODE]. What options does it give you in the very first line? Algebraic and RPN (not RPL). And the manual calls it RPN. So if HP and the 50g itself call it RPN, it's RPN.

(2) Don't forget that "RPN" is an acronym that actually stands for something. Just as "1+2" is algebraic notation, "1 2 +" is Reverse Polish Notation. Which of those expressions are understood by the 50g? BOTH of them. So it's both an algebraic and an RPN machine. Furthermore, RPN (the NOTATION) makes no assumptions whatsoever about the size of the stack or the existence of a command line or the existence of stack lift disabling. Those things have nothing to do with whether a machine is RPN or not; they are merely different ways of IMPLEMENTING RPN. If the user calculates 1 plus 2 by keying 1 2 +, then the machine is RPN. The rest is details.

[toml_12953]

(09-24-2018 10:22 PM)Craig Bladow Wrote:  I have seen the HP-41 programming language referred to as ‘FOCAL’ which, according to Wikipedia means FOrty-One CAlculator Language”.

Yeah but us old PDP-8 programmers hate that! FOCAL was a totally different language used on PDPs

[Massimo Gnerucci]

(09-25-2018 12:59 AM)toml_12953 Wrote:  

(09-24-2018 10:22 PM)Craig Bladow Wrote:  I have seen the HP-41 programming language referred to as ‘FOCAL’ which, according to Wikipedia means FOrty-One CAlculator Language”.

Yeah but us old PDP-8 programmers hate that! FOCAL was a totally different language used on PDPs

But that was an Algebraic Language!