From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: dave at horsfall.org (Dave Horsfall) Date: Sat, 21 Mar 2020 09:51:07 +1100 (EST) Subject: [COFF] The most surprising Unix programs In-Reply-To: References: <202003132331.02DNVaxN061501@tahoe.cs.Dartmouth.EDU> <7ec47fd97b1a3d383ffed428f21f5287@firemail.cc> <6D9CA6C2-BDF2-4BCA-9503-0F8415C594C9@guertin.net> <211b9d54-573c-05d3-2c60-e15a9fc0b86b@tnetconsulting.net> <202003201640.02KGerlG470796@darkstar.fourwinds.com> <0b0d0ba3-7eae-a844-cc9a-ae542edb302b@tnetconsulting.net> Message-ID: On Fri, 20 Mar 2020, Grant Taylor via COFF wrote: > What I think I'm hearing you say is that with RPN you were shouldering > part of the computational load based on how you were entering things so > that they aligned as necessary with the stack. Conversely, you were > simply "plug and chug" (as I've heard elsewhere). Meaning you entered > the equation / formula and were largely hands off from the calculation. > > Is that accurate? You may need parentheses, which not all algebraic calculators have (and the ones that do have limited nesting). Ironic really; either you have to do what RPN users do i.e. work "inside out" if you have a small stack or the calculator has to implement one :-) -- Dave