DM32 review

[Vincent Weber]

The more I use it, the more I like it!
I think the DM32 has the potential of becoming the "35S done right".
I have been thinking of 2 kinds of improvements : non-intrusive ones, gently expanding the functionality while retaining full compatibility. And intrusive ones, that would break compatibility, probably through a new special mode.

I) Non-intrusive:

- Double the numbers of labels and directly accessible registers with lowercase letters (using shift keys) ;
-Increase the number of indirectly accessible registers. Just store 100 in i, and RCL(i) would be valid. Don't bother with the double indexing (I and J) of the 35S, too disruptive for little benefit;
-Introduce labels that are local to a lettered program (00...99) using shift keys;
-Enhance equation editing not to have to delete from the right, with left and right arrow keys, that could simply be mapped to 2 of the F-keys;
-Enhance equation functionality to match the 35S', by allowing STOring into temp variables, and pressing RDN to use (read-only) REGX, REGY, REGZ, REGT and possibly REGL (alternative would be to use LASTX as allowed in the 35S);
-Expand COMPLEX to support ENTER, X<>Y, LASTX, RDN, RUP... for full 2-level complex stack, as pointed by JF;
-Expand complex functions to reverse trigs and hyperbolics;
-Introduce vectors? Not sure, they are pretty useless on the 35;
-Introduce physics constants in a separate menu.

II) Intrusive:

This would mainly dealing with introducing one-line complex numbers, to bring the functionality closer to the 42S', maybe without the little flaw of having to use 2 stack levels to enter a complex number. Maybe COMPLEX, in this mode, could accept One-line entry, like 1 COMPLEX 2 on one line would generate 1+2i. Some thinking has to be done, probably we would need a polar mode and annunciator, and a way to extract parts from a complex number, unlike the biggest design flaw of the 35S!

What do you guys think?