Post Reply 
newRPL: symbolic numbers
12-30-2014, 10:00 AM (This post was last modified: 12-30-2014 10:08 AM by Gilles.)
Post: #18
RE: newRPL: symbolic numbers
Quote:f: << -> X '3*X+pi' >>
where 'pi' is a constant (symbolic, no dot).
Under newRPL (proposed):
4 f --> '12+pi'
4. f --> '12.+pi'
4 f. --> 15.14... (the additional EVAL or ->NUM replaces the constant)
4. f. --> 15.14...

OK.

In my opinion, the '.' is ->NUM and not EVAL.

By the way, the unary operator ~ suggested by Han seems the same as ->NUM. I like this ~ notation.
And perhaps f~ would be more explicit that f. And in this case, both f~ and f ~ will be correct

'pi' ~ will return 3.14159...

Quote:'f(4)' EVAL --> '12+pi'
'f(4.)' EVAL --> '12.+pi'
'f.(4)' EVAL --> 15.14...
'f.(4.)' EVAL --> 15.14...

for the 2 last, with the suggestion of Han

'f~(4)' EVAL --> 15.14...
'f~(4.)' EVAL --> 15.14...
or
'f(4)' ~

I would like this but the disadvantage is that the ~ is not directly on the keyboard with only a keypress on the contrary of .

Quote:(...) It will sure take some time to get used to the new way. Programs will have to be crafted with the trailing dot in mind, and that means no backwards compatibility. On the other hand, if "no backwards compatibility=no awkward compatibility" I'm in favor.

I agree. Anyway you already have loosed the backward compatibility with better behavior of DOSUBS , DOLIST, ADD, + ...

Quote:I don't see a big difference in user effort to reach the desired solution (perhaps less effort?). I do see more consistency in the proposed solution, where the result depends only on what you type.

OK.

Another thing, I like that uppercase and lowercase are not the same thing in commands and functions in RPL.
But i would be pleased if all the native commands and functions in newRLP will use lowercases instead of uppercases : start next , for next , cos, sin ... (or Start For Next Cos, Sin) are more readable and less agressive than START NEXT or FOR NEXT COS SIN
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 


Messages In This Thread
newRPL: symbolic numbers - Claudio L. - 12-22-2014, 11:01 PM
RE: newRPL: symbolic numbers - John Galt - 12-23-2014, 01:13 AM
RE: newRPL: symbolic numbers - Claudio L. - 12-23-2014, 03:34 PM
RE: newRPL: symbolic numbers - Nigel (UK) - 12-23-2014, 12:06 PM
RE: newRPL: symbolic numbers - Claudio L. - 12-23-2014, 03:10 PM
RE: newRPL: symbolic numbers - Claudio L. - 12-23-2014, 05:22 PM
RE: newRPL: symbolic numbers - Nigel (UK) - 12-23-2014, 05:57 PM
RE: newRPL: symbolic numbers - Claudio L. - 12-23-2014, 09:01 PM
RE: newRPL: symbolic numbers - Nigel (UK) - 12-23-2014, 09:49 PM
RE: newRPL: symbolic numbers - Claudio L. - 12-24-2014, 03:15 AM
RE: newRPL: symbolic numbers - brouhaha - 12-23-2014, 09:27 PM
RE: newRPL: symbolic numbers - Gilles - 12-24-2014, 11:12 AM
RE: newRPL: symbolic numbers - Claudio L. - 12-24-2014, 07:51 PM
RE: newRPL: symbolic numbers - Claudio L. - 12-29-2014, 03:19 PM
RE: newRPL: symbolic numbers - Gilles - 12-29-2014, 07:38 PM
RE: newRPL: symbolic numbers - Claudio L. - 12-29-2014, 10:21 PM
RE: newRPL: symbolic numbers - Han - 12-29-2014, 09:33 PM
RE: newRPL: symbolic numbers - Gilles - 12-30-2014 10:00 AM
RE: newRPL: symbolic numbers - Claudio L. - 12-30-2014, 02:19 PM
RE: newRPL: symbolic numbers - rprosperi - 12-30-2014, 02:26 PM
RE: newRPL: symbolic numbers - Han - 12-30-2014, 04:50 PM
RE: newRPL: symbolic numbers - Claudio L. - 12-30-2014, 07:18 PM
RE: newRPL: symbolic numbers - Gilles - 12-30-2014, 10:18 PM
RE: newRPL: symbolic numbers - Claudio L. - 12-30-2014, 10:39 PM



User(s) browsing this thread: 2 Guest(s)