+- 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: HMS-> & ->HMS Prog. for 12C (/thread-9893.html)
HMS-> & ->HMS Prog. for 12C - Carsen - 01-10-2018 05:18 AM
I am inspired by Gamo to post some HP-12C programs! I have honed these 2 programs for a couple of months now. Since I collect driving times everyday, I need to convert the DD.MMSSSS into a number and vice versa.
Here is HMS to decimal format
Code:
01 [ENTER]
02 [g] [INTG]
03 [SWAP]
04 [g] [FRAC]
05 [EEX]
06 2
07 [x]
08 [ENTER]
09 [g] [INTG]
10 [SWAP]
11 [g] [FRAC]
12 [ . ]
13 6
14 [ / ]
15 [+]
16 6
17 0
18 [ / ]
19 [+]Now here is my other program that converts from decimal to DD.MMSSSS
Code:
01 [ENTER]
02 [g] [INTG]
03 [SWAP]
04 [g] [FRAC]
05 6
06 0
07 [x]
08 [ENTER]
09 [g] [INTG]
10 [EEX]
11 2
12 [ / ]
13 [SWAP]
14 [g] [FRAC]
15 6
16 0
17 [x]
18 [EEX]
19 4
20 [ / ]
21 [+]
22 [+]I even dare say this program is better than Eddie Shore's program (I ran into his program as I was scouring the forums to check for a similar post as this one) This is because it is shorter, doesn't use any registers, and both of our (Me & Eddie) programs completely wipe any intermediate results stored in the stack before program execution. However, I can't say who's is better in the contest of speed, as I only have a modern HP-12C.
The only reason why I bring up Eddie's program is because he writes a lot of programs and seems experienced. So I'm comparing my first programs with his. And I wrote this program completely on my own, with refinements over time.
I also expect Deiter (I think I spelled his name right) to check and cirque my program. Just like with Gamo's programs.
RE: HMS-> & ->HMS Prog. for 12C - Carsen - 01-10-2018 05:22 AM
I just realized that programs should generally be posted in the General Software Library. I'll make sure to do so next time. I also didn't check that section of the forum for a similar post. My apologies. I'm learning.
RE: HMS-> & ->HMS Prog. for 12C - Gamo - 01-10-2018 06:49 AM
Thank You Carsen
That will be better to provide example for both programs.
Gamo
RE: HMS-> & ->HMS Prog. for 12C - Dieter - 01-10-2018 10:37 AM
(01-10-2018 05:18 AM)Carsen Wrote: I am inspired by Gamo to post some HP-12C programs! I have honed these 2 programs for a couple of months now. Since I collect driving times everyday, I need to convert the DD.MMSSSS into a number and vice versa.
I like the formulas shown in this thread on the old forum. The following program adapts Werner's 42s implementation.
Code:
01 ENTER
02 CLX
03 x<>y
04 x<=y?
05 GTO 23
06 ENTER
07 FRAC
08 ,
09 4
10 x
11 -
12 EEX
13 4
14 %
15 FRAC
16 2
17 5
18 0
19 /
20 -
21 CHS
22 GTO 00
23 CHS
24 ENTER
25 INTG
26 ,
27 4
28 *
29 -
30 EEX
31 2
32 *
33 ENTER
34 INTG
35 ,
36 4
37 *
38 -
39 3
40 6
41 /
42 GTO 00Rule: values in hh.mmss format are entered and returned with negative sign.
Code:
3,1234 [R/S] => -3:07'24.24"
[R/S] => 3,1234 hours
2,75 [R/S] => -2:45
-2,15 [R/S] => 2,25Edit: I just noticed...
(01-10-2018 05:18 AM)Carsen Wrote: I also expect Deiter (I think I spelled his name right)
Well.... but at least it sounds right if you say it in English. ;-)
(01-10-2018 05:18 AM)Carsen Wrote: to check and cirque my program. Just like with Gamo's programs.
You can still improve it. For instance, in your first program you can save two steps if you replace lines 01–04 and 08–11 (as well as the first lines of you second program) with
Code:
INTG
LSTX
FRCIn your second program you first multiply by 60 and then divide by 10000. Here a simple multiplication by ,006 will do.
And finally: welcome to the club. ;-)
Dieter
RE: HMS-> & ->HMS Prog. for 12C - Carsen - 01-11-2018 04:46 AM
(01-10-2018 10:37 AM)Dieter Wrote: The following program adapts Werner's 42s implementation.
Code:
01 ENTER
02 CLX
03 x<>y
04 x<=y?
05 GTO 23
06 ENTER
07 FRAC
08 ,
09 4
10 x
11 -
12 EEX
13 4
14 %
15 FRAC
16 2
17 5
18 0
19 /
20 -
21 CHS
22 GTO 00
23 CHS
24 ENTER
25 INTG
26 ,
27 4
28 *
29 -
30 EEX
31 2
32 *
33 ENTER
34 INTG
35 ,
36 4
37 *
38 -
39 3
40 6
41 /
42 GTO 00
Rule: values in hh.mmss format are entered and returned with negative sign.
I LOVE this program simply because I don't have to switch program lines to convert from HH.MMSS to decimal and vice versa. It's pretty cool. I'll end up using this program. The formulas it uses is also unique and fun.
But I'm still going to keep and work on my own HMS programs. I made the suggested changes and that's so cool because now the program takes up one less register. I also tried to make some more amends but to no avail.
HMS to decimal program V3.
Code:
01 g INTG
02 g LSTX
03 g FRAC
04 EEX
05 2
06 x
07 g INTG
08 g LSTX
09 g FRAC
10 [ . ]
11 6
12 /
13 +
14 6
15 0
16 /
17 +And the decimal to HMS program V3
Code:
01 g INTG
02 g LSTX
03 g FRAC
04 6
05 0
06 x
07 g FRAC
08 g LSTX
09 g INTG
10 EEX
11 2
12 /
13 SWAP
14 [ . ]
15 0
16 0
17 6
18 x
19 +
20 +Examples Gamo? No problem. I'll use the driving times I collected today...
Example #1: Carsen's takes a trip to his job. He times himself on how fast he gets to his job and back home. Trip #1 is his venture to his job and trip #2 is his drive back home. Convert the times Carsen collected on both of his trips from HH.MMSS to decimal format. Then figure out his total time he spent getting back and forth from his job that day. Assume that the HMS to decimal prog. is entered into the 12C first. Then the decimal to HMS prog. is entered second. Thus decimal to HMS prog. starts on line #19.
Trip #1: 0 hr 55 min & 53 sec
0.5553 [R/S] ---> 0.931388889 [STO] [+] 1
Trip #2: 0 hr 53 min & 00 sec
0.53 [R/S] ---> 0.883333333 [STO] [+]. Then...
[RCL] 1 ---> 1.814722222. Finally...
[GTO] 19 [R/S] ---> 1.4853 which is 1 hr 48 min & 53 sec.
Sweet! I'm in the club!
RE: HMS-> & ->HMS Prog. for 12C - Pekis - 01-11-2018 06:08 AM
... and this thread for mathematical proof of my formulas, but beware of rounding
...
RE: HMS-> & ->HMS Prog. for 12C - Dieter - 01-11-2018 07:03 PM
(01-11-2018 06:08 AM)Pekis Wrote: ... and this thread for mathematical proof of my formulas,
Ah, so it was you who started that thread.
(01-11-2018 06:08 AM)Pekis Wrote: but beware of rounding
Definitely. Calculating with base-60-numbers in the decimal world can be tricky. This reminds me of a 2016 thread where such problems were discussed in detail. Here even in such a powerful language as Fortran. But with binary floating point operations... #-)
Pekis: take a look at post #28 in the linked thread. ;-)
Carsen: here is an improved version that adapts the formulas in that thread. It also preserves the Y-register so that simple hh.mmss arithmetics can be done without storing intermediate results. And it's even one step shorter. ;-)
Code:
01 ENTER
02 CLX
03 x<>y
04 x<=y?
05 GTO 24
06 +
07 ENTER
08 FRAC
09 ,
10 4
11 x
12 -
13 EEX
14 4
15 %
16 FRAC
17 2
18 5
19 0
20 /
21 -
22 CHS
23 GTO 00
24 -
25 EEX
26 4
28 %
29 FRAC
20 1
30 5
31 0
32 /
33 +
34 ENTER
35 FRAC
36 1
37 ,
38 5
39 /
40 +
41 GTO 00Re. your example:
Code:
-0,5553 [R/S] => 0,913888889
-0,5300 [R/S] => 0,883333333
[+] => 1,814722222
[R/S] => -1,4853Dieter
RE: HMS-> & ->HMS Prog. for 12C - Pekis - 01-11-2018 09:22 PM
...
Could you show the result of converting 8/60 to HMS with your program
? It's the "acid" test ...
Thanks
RE: HMS-> & ->HMS Prog. for 12C - Dieter - 01-12-2018 09:13 AM
(01-11-2018 09:22 PM)Pekis Wrote: ...
Could you show the result of converting 8/60 to HMS with your program
? It's the "acid" test ...
Thanks
The program returns -0,07599999999. Which is displayed as -0,0760. ;-)
But actually this is the correct (!) result. Here's why:
You do not enter 8/60, but 0,1333333333 – a number slightly less than 8/60. And the exact HMS value for this is 7'59,99999988" which is correctly rounded to 7'59,9999999".
Try it: 0,1333333333 h times 3600 s/h equals 479,99999988 s. Or 7 minutes and 59,99999988 seconds. Which is what the above implementation returns.
For the same reason HMS(7/60) should (and here does) return 7'00,0000001" on a 10-digit calculator. Simply because 0,1166666667 is a tiny bit more than 7/60.
So yes, this indeed is an acid test: if the result is exactly 8'00" or 7'00" the function would be wrong and do some kind of "cosmetic rounding". Which is not what a decent calculator should do. ;-)
Dieter
RE: HMS-> & ->HMS Prog. for 12C - Pekis - 01-12-2018 12:36 PM
Thanks for the answer.
DEG->DMS(8/60) would be evaluated as 0.08 (expected result) on an infinite precision machine with my formula
DEG->DMS(x)=(90*x+INT(60*x)+100*INT(x))/250
( DMS->DEG(x)=(250*x-INT(100*x)-60*INT(x))/90 )
Look at the result on a limited precision machine as the argument tends to 8/60:
0.13 ---> 0.0748
0.133 ---> 0.07588
0.1333 ---> 0.075988
0.13333 ---> 0.0759988
0.133333 ---> 0.07599988
0.1333333 ---> 0.075999988
...
"8/60" ---> 0.076
Is there something wrong seeing 0.075999999999.... naturally rounded to 0.076 by the machine ?
What do you think of it ?
RE: HMS-> & ->HMS Prog. for 12C - Dieter - 01-12-2018 12:50 PM
(01-12-2018 12:36 PM)Pekis Wrote: Thanks for the answer.
Which one?
(01-12-2018 12:36 PM)Pekis Wrote: Is there something wrong seeing 0.075999999999.... naturally rounded to 0.076 by the machine ?
If the result actually was exactly 7'60" I'd say that this should not occur. But here we are talking about 0,07599999999 which is only displayed as 0,0760. And that's fine by me: it can even serve as a hint that the result is a tiny bit less than 8 minutes. ;-)
Dieter
RE: HMS-> & ->HMS Prog. for 12C - Carsen - 01-13-2018 01:26 AM
(01-11-2018 07:03 PM)Dieter Wrote: Carsen: here is an improved version that adapts the formulas in that thread. It also preserves the Y-register so that simple hh.mmss arithmetics can be done without storing intermediate results. And it's even one step shorter. ;-)
Code:
01 ENTER
02 CLX
03 x<>y
04 x<=y?
05 GTO 24
06 +
07 ENTER
08 FRAC
09 ,
10 4
11 x
12 -
13 EEX
14 4
15 %
16 FRAC
17 2
18 5
19 0
20 /
21 -
22 CHS
23 GTO 00
24 -
25 EEX
26 4
28 %
29 FRAC
20 1
30 5
31 0
32 /
33 +
34 ENTER
35 FRAC
36 1
37 ,
38 5
39 /
40 +
41 GTO 00
Dieter! This. New. Version. Is. Amazing. Thanks a lot.
And I'm sure you know why its so cool. Preserving the Y register is SO useful for what I do 5 days a week, collecting that sort of data. And rather than using my 50g, the Voyager series is just perfect with its size and power consumption.