Post Reply 
Casio anomaly or gremlin or bug...
09-09-2017, 06:05 PM (This post was last modified: 09-09-2017 06:07 PM by Matt Agajanian.)
Post: #37
RE: Casio anomaly or gremlin or bug...
(09-09-2017 03:23 PM)Eddie W. Shore Wrote:  This may fall under the same category of squaring negative numbers on algebraic calculators: where on some:

-3^2 returns -9. The calculator treats squaring as priority over negation - prevalent in TI graphing calculators.

For the record:

TI-84 Plus CE:
6/2(1+2) returns 9

HP Prime:
6/2(1+2) returns 9

The HP48GX doesn't allow implied multiplication. I tend to agree with this; in practice I inserting multiplication signs.

I think in this case, I would side with caution and put an additional set of parenthesis if you meant 6/(2(1+2)) or a multiplication sign if you meant 6/2*(1+2).

Which brings up a question, should implied multiplication on calculators be allowed at all?

Eddie, you bring up a valid point which does bring up perplexing shakeups of convention. For instance, while implied multiplication may (strengthened by a long-standing convention in print) be accepted in non-electronic setting, yes, textbooks, tables, print media, etc. should be tools that require thought processes rather than simply plug-and-play (yes, a play on the 90s interface jargon) data entry. So yes, just like AOS, Direct Formula Entry, and pre 2000 data entry methods from Sharp, Casio,TI, etc., implied multiplication on calculators should be disallowed as this thread had demonstrated in the ambiguities introduced in such usage.
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 

Messages In This Thread
RE: Casio anomaly or gremlin or bug... - Matt Agajanian - 09-09-2017 06:05 PM

User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)