From: gtaylor at tnetconsulting.net (Grant Taylor)
Subject: [COFF] [TUHS] The most surprising Unix programs
Date: Fri, 20 Mar 2020 10:07:39 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <f47a30b8-884a-843b-d820-d9d4da21ba3d@tnetconsulting.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200320140308.4FBBB18C073@mercury.lcs.mit.edu>
[-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --]
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3929 bytes --]
+COFF
On 3/20/20 8:03 AM, Noel Chiappa wrote:
> Maybe I'm being clueless/over-asking, but to me it's appalling that
> any college student (at least all who have _any_ math requirement at
> all; not sure how many that is) doesn't know how an RPN calculator
> works.
I'm sure that there are some people, maybe not the corpus you mention,
that have zero clue how an RPN calculator works. But I would expect
anybody with a little gumption to be able to poke a few buttons and
probably figure out the basic operation, or, ask if they are genuinely
confused.
> It's not exactly rocket science, and any reasonably intelligent
> high-schooler should get it extremely quickly; just tell them it's
> just a representational thing, number number operator instead of
> number operator number.
I agree that RPN is not rocket science. And for basic single operation
equations, I think that it's largely interchangeable with infix notation.
However, my experience is, as the number of operations goes up, RPN can
become more difficult to use. This is likely a mental shortcoming on my
part. But it is something that does take tractable mental effort for me
to do.
For example, let's start with Pythagorean Theorem
a² + b² = c²
This is relatively easy to enter in infix notation on a typical
scientific calculator.
However, I have to stop and think about how to enter this on an RPN
calculator. I'll take a swing at this, but I might get it wrong, and I
don't have anything handy to test at the moment.
[a] [enter]
[a] [enter]
[multiply]
[b] [enter]
[b] [enter]
[multiply]
[add]
[square root] # to solve for c
(12 keys)
Conversely infix notation for comparison.
[a]
[square]
[plus]
[b]
[square]
[square root]
(6 keys)
As I type this, I realize that I'm using higher order operations
(square) in infix than I am in RPN. But that probably speaks to my
ignorance of RPN.
I also realize that this equation does a poor job at demonstrating what
I'm trying to convey. — Or perhaps what I'm trying to convey is
incorrect. — I had to arrange sub-different parts of the equation so
that their results ended up together on the stack for them to be the
targets of the operation. I believe this (re)arrangement of the
equation is where most of my mental load / objection comes from with
RPN. I feel like I have to process the equation before I can tell the
calculator to compute the result for me. I don't feel like I have this
burden with infix notation.
Aside: I firmly believe that computers are supposed to do our bidding,
not the other way around. s/computers/calculators/
> I know it's not a key intellectual skill, but it does seem to me to
> be part of comon intellectual heritage that everyone should know,
> like musical scales or poetry rhyming. Have you ever considered
> taking two minutes (literally!) to cover it briefly, just 'someone
> tried to borrow my RPN calculator, here's the basic idea of how they
> work'?
I'm confident that 80% of people, more of the corpus you describe, could
use an RPN calculator to do simple equations. But I would not be
surprised if many found that the re-arrangement of equations to being
RPN friendly would simply forego the RPN calculator for simpler
arithmetic operations.
I think some of it is a mental question: Which has more mental load,
doing the annoying arithmetic or re-arranging to use RPN.
I believe that for the simpler of the arithmetic operations, RPN is
going to be more difficult.
All of this being said, I'd love to have someone lay out points and / or
counterpoints to my understanding.
--
Grant. . . .
unix || die
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 4013 bytes
Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
URL: <http://minnie.tuhs.org/pipermail/coff/attachments/20200320/6c9c556f/attachment.bin>
next parent reply other threads:[~2020-03-20 16:07 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <20200320140308.4FBBB18C073@mercury.lcs.mit.edu>
2020-03-20 16:07 ` gtaylor [this message]
2020-03-20 20:33 ` mike.ab3ap
2020-03-21 3:53 ` dave
2020-03-21 4:11 ` paul
[not found] <202003132331.02DNVaxN061501@tahoe.cs.Dartmouth.EDU>
[not found] ` <7ec47fd97b1a3d383ffed428f21f5287@firemail.cc>
[not found] ` <CALMnNGjuQybT8_g_g498dOuV9OV67JEOn7Mz34vG1TeO9WrkYw@mail.gmail.com>
[not found] ` <cdef128a21d3ed60c79dc5253d761652@firemail.cc>
[not found] ` <20200317145723.GF26660@mcvoy.com>
2020-03-17 15:41 ` clemc
2020-03-17 22:48 ` dave
[not found] ` <alpine.BSF.2.21.9999.2003180908300.10777@aneurin.horsfall.org>
[not found] ` <c44be69f-846d-55f2-2709-8765f7f5fcc4@gmail.com>
2020-03-19 21:31 ` dave
2020-03-19 21:30 ` cym224
2020-03-19 21:48 ` stewart
2020-03-21 2:49 ` dave
2020-03-21 2:55 ` lm
[not found] ` <6D9CA6C2-BDF2-4BCA-9503-0F8415C594C9@guertin.net>
2020-03-20 15:40 ` gtaylor
[not found] ` <202003201640.02KGerlG470796@darkstar.fourwinds.com>
[not found] ` <0b0d0ba3-7eae-a844-cc9a-ae542edb302b@tnetconsulting.net>
2020-03-20 19:11 ` clemc
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=f47a30b8-884a-843b-d820-d9d4da21ba3d@tnetconsulting.net \
--to=coff@minnie.tuhs.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).