Is RPN still relevant?

[dm319]

(12-19-2023 10:45 AM)Maximilian Hohmann Wrote:  I really enjoy this thread because it is about the very essence of why I spend so much time and money for calculators.

Me too! This is a really fun thread. It is nice that we have assembled here in an obscure corner of the internet to debate the relevance of an unpopular notation (RPN) on a dying platform (pocket calculator)!

(12-19-2023 10:45 AM)Maximilian Hohmann Wrote:  And can anything be done to resurrect it?

We need:
1. A cheap RPN scientific that is palatable for kids and meets school/exam requirements
2. A worldwide lobbying group / cult that continually promotes the benefits of RPN in education.
3. Children that want to use it.

(12-19-2023 03:14 AM)Thomas Klemm Wrote:  Thus I assume that our results agree.

Yes, I always do a 1.1x to give me a bit of leeway. If you aim to arrive home with exactly 0%, for one thing the power progressively disappears as you approach your drive, which is disconcerting, and secondly, any slight variance or detour and stress levels can rise...

(12-19-2023 10:45 AM)Maximilian Hohmann Wrote:  Computing the range and charging time is not an exact science.

True, but I think we can be more accurate than the car computers often suggest. They really have no idea IMO. As a ballpark, my afternoon commute is very similar in terms of consumption to my morning commute (as it is over similar road), so that is a good guide. I use my calculator if I'm either being 1. stingy with how much electricity I'm paying for or 2. impatient charging en-route on my way somewhere. You should try it! I have a very useful solver-like program which is very quick. Maybe your mental arithmetic is better than mine though.

(12-19-2023 02:51 AM)avsebastian Wrote:  They hate the HP calculator, especially the use of the RPN.

I always thought finance people and RPN were strange bed fellows. I suspect that the 12C arrived at its position not by virtue of being RPN, but despite that because of its accuracy. It has such a terrific UI for 'solving'. Ingenious to use the concept that if you press two variables in a row, then you are indicating you want it to solve. However, it feels a bit of a black box until you realise that is how it works (I was an idiot for a while and thought the 12x and 12/ buttons just did that - times and divide by 12, which really really confused me). I bet you a number of finance people in the 80s/90s used it just to get the values, then used an algebraic calculator for subsequent calculations.

What is so great about the solvers on HPs is that you use it within the calculator UI. Which means that the answer is usable straight away. That seems to go nicely with RPN.

I tried the TVM interface on the TI-83+ recently (in my ongoing bid to create a cheap RPN calculator courtesy of bxparks), and it is terrible! I have to navigate to each variable, type in the value, and then to solve it I must find a tiny 'solve' writing which needs a modifier key. If figure if it is going to be so much less efficient, it should at least be really obvious. And I can't seemingly use values I calculated in the calculator, nor can I use the solved values back in the calculator.

(12-19-2023 07:54 AM)Peter Klein Wrote:  Here's to us "pokers."

Hear hear! - a fellow poker.