+- HP Forums (https://www.hpmuseum.org/forum)
+-- Forum: HP Calculators (and very old HP Computers) (/forum-3.html)
+--- Forum: General Forum (/forum-4.html)
+--- Thread: An (i) for an i—29C’s usage (/thread-13502.html)
An (i) for an i—29C’s usage - Matt Agajanian - 08-23-2019 06:15 PM
Hi all
As the 67 uses I for the storage directly into the I register and (i) was the indirection usage, why was the 19/29C’s i operator used for indirection operations (GTO i GSB i), etc.) and not (i) like the 67/97?
Thanks
RE: An (i) for an i—29C’s usage - Thomas Okken - 08-24-2019 12:00 AM
On the 19C/29C, the I register is register 0. I assume that the HP designers felt that the distinction between 0 and i was clear enough without using parentheses as a hint that indirect addressing is happening.
RE: An (i) for an i—29C’s usage - Matt Agajanian - 08-24-2019 12:36 AM
(08-24-2019 12:00 AM)Thomas Okken Wrote: On the 19C/29C, the I register is register 0. I assume that the HP designers felt that the distinction between 0 and i was clear enough without using parentheses as a hint that indirect addressing is happening.
I hadn’t thought of that. That train of thinking helps me put things in perspective.
Thanks
RE: An (i) for an i—29C’s usage - Archilog - 08-24-2019 01:46 AM
Hello,
As an old user of the 29c (since 83), I never have had problems to use those two sides of the Indirect Register; the reciprocal is not true: when I many years later acquired a 67, the use of I or (i) were - and nowadays is - problematic.
RE: An (i) for an i—29C’s usage - Matt Agajanian - 08-24-2019 05:10 AM
Archilog, ‘Problematic’? Please explain.
Thanks