The Museum of HP Calculators

HP Forum Archive 11

[ Return to Index | Top of Index ]

How about an 'RPN Excercises Page'?
Message #1 Posted by Jeremy on 18 Mar 2003, 1:29 p.m.

First, let me say that I'm aware of the page our good buddy David has put together on getting started in RPN. I read through it and have a pretty good grasp on it. However, for something so different from the norm (for many people) it can take a bit more than that to learn how to use it as thoroughly as algebraic.

So I was thinking that maybe one/some of the experts out there might volunteer to put together an RPN excercises page to help us RPN novices get into the swing of things. There would be problem after problem, starting from pretty basic stuff and progressing to advanced stuff, and finally to the little tricks, like filling the stack with a number to use it as a constant. It would also include problems on stuff to help teach the RPN-unique keys, like last X, R->, etc. There are probably more of them that I don't even know yet.

I think that probably most of the people who hang out here are experts on the topic, so maybe there isn't as much of a demand as I think there is, but there have got to be people like me around who know just enough to get around, but not quite enough that they can completely replace their TIs comfortably. ;)

What do you all think?

-Jeremy

      
Re: How about an 'RPN Excercises Page'?
Message #2 Posted by Vieira, Luiz C. (Brazil) on 18 Mar 2003, 1:50 p.m.,
in response to message #1 by Jeremy

Hi, Jeremy;

I'm far from being an expert, but I know many vintage and earlier HP manuals have significant amount of examples and exercises. What manuals do you have? What calculators do you own? I think some examples and exercises may be of general scope, but soem others may take advantage of some specific stack manipulation functions that are exclusive to some models OR not available in all of them. For example, not all vintage and even a few earlier models have the R^(roll-up) function, and it is a lotr usefull sometimes.

I have a few of the good Vintage manuals myself (HP67/97, HP25 and HP55) and some earlier ones. What about creating a PDF document with some examples based on these ones? If you think it's a good idea, I can do it. I only have to find the time, and Wednesday is a better day for me.

Hope this is about what you have in mind.

Best regards.

Luiz C. Vieira - Brazil

            
I don't have ANY manuals yet...
Message #3 Posted by Jeremy on 18 Mar 2003, 5:24 p.m.,
in response to message #2 by Vieira, Luiz C. (Brazil)

I should have a 48G with a manual delivered to my door within the next few days. (I had a 48GX before, but got rid of it in disgust...) I think I will buy the manual on CD from MoHP on the HP45 I just fixed the other day too.

I do remember some good examples in the 48GX manual. I'm thinking of something more complex though, something from the minds of the forumers. Something that would maybe help people before they have to ask here how to do something in RPN.

I suppose maybe it is a matter of having spare time to create such a document though...

-Jeremy

                  
Re: I don't have ANY manuals yet...
Message #4 Posted by Chan Tran on 18 Mar 2003, 5:50 p.m.,
in response to message #3 by Jeremy

The 48 has (may I call it) RPL and the 45 has traditonal RPN which are significantly different. I think you should concentrate on mastering the 45 first then move on to the 48.

                        
I agree...
Message #5 Posted by Vieira, Luiz C. (Brazil) on 18 Mar 2003, 9:38 p.m.,
in response to message #4 by Chan Tran

Hi;

Chan Tran is right: mastering RPN is the first step to RPL. But I "see" and feel RPL as the evolution, the "RPN's next step". Is that what you mean, Chan Tran?

I know many contributors in here do not agree with this, but RPL was developed based on what RPN users would like to have as enhancements.

I use and program both user-level interfaces, no matter at all. I completely agree with Chan Tran that RPN knowledge allows a better understanding of RPL concepts. And it should be.

Best regards.

Luiz C. Vieira - Brazil

                              
Learn RPN before RPL?
Message #6 Posted by Karl Schneider on 18 Mar 2003, 11:36 p.m.,
in response to message #5 by Vieira, Luiz C. (Brazil)

Luiz Veira said,

"But I 'see' and feel RPL as the evolution, the 'RPN's next step'".

This may indeed be true, but I believe that it was a step that should not have been taken -- one that led to the precipice of over-complexity.

I have the 28C, 48G, and 49G, and feel that none of them are particularly intuitive or simple to use and navigate. Of course, that's a discussion that's been hashed over many times in this forum, and I'm not looking to start another.

I got two 28C's with manuals on eBay -- a near-mint one for $37 and a real good one for $25. The mint one arrived in its original(?) box with a 1986 price tag of $212. I think someone quickly found the 28C a little more than they could chew, or were unpleasantly surprised to find that it didn't work quite like the older ones.

                                    
The HP28C has a storng handicap.
Message #7 Posted by Vieira, Luiz C. (Brazil) on 19 Mar 2003, 12:02 a.m.,
in response to message #6 by Karl Schneider

Hi, Karl;

the HP28C has a strng handicap: 4KRAM. Add to it the not-so-intuitive first-stage RPL and we have an ugly duck.

I had an HP28C in hands. Low memory condition is easily achieved when you are dealing with complex matrices or extensive algebraic manipulations.

I like all enhancements RPL brought and I learnt the basics (say, user RPL) too fast because I was kinda waiting for something like that.

As you said, that's a discussion that's been hashed over many times in this forum, and I'm not looking to start another and I second you.

Best regards, my friend.

Luiz C. Vieira - Brazil

                                          
Re: The HP28C has a storng handicap.
Message #8 Posted by James M. Prange on 19 Mar 2003, 9:04 p.m.,
in response to message #7 by Vieira, Luiz C. (Brazil)

I'll add that the 28S also has a strong handicap. It has 32KB of RAM, and if you lose memory for any reason, the only way to get anything back into it is via the keyboard.

I once had the sad experience of replacing the low batteries in my 28S with "brand-new" fresh off the shelf N cells, only to find that the 28S turned itself off after momentarily turning on the display. When I put the old batteries back in it displayed "Memory Lost" along with the low battery icon. It turned out that the "new" batteries must've been sitting "on the shelf" for an awfully long time; they were almost completely dead. Never again will I put any battery in a calculator without testing it first.

I did have almost all of my programs neatly printed out and attached to 5" by 8" index cards with notes for comments, checksum, size, any required programs, any programs that used the program, and any other information that seemed relevant. But of course I never did key most of them back in. Well, that's one way to purge unneeded objects from memory.

                              
Re: I agree...
Message #9 Posted by Chan Tran on 19 Mar 2003, 9:27 a.m.,
in response to message #5 by Vieira, Luiz C. (Brazil)

Right Luiz. I think RPL is better because it's more consistent than RPN. You don't have exception when a function takes more than 2 arguments and returns more than 1 result. I understand that sometimes RPL is less convienient than RPN but overall I think it's an improvement.

                        
Re: I don't have ANY manuals yet...
Message #10 Posted by James M. Prange on 19 Mar 2003, 1:19 p.m.,
in response to message #4 by Chan Tran

I learned RPL long before I learned what little I know of "Classic RPN". For myself, I find classic RPN rather difficult to use, inconsistent in that it has some prefix commands, very limiting, and a bit hard to get accustomed to, but fairly easy to learn; after all, RPL is (except maybe for program structure words) an extended form of RPN. I doubt that it makes much difference which you learn first. Except, perhaps, that if you learn RPL, you might not have very much motivation to take a step backwards to classic RPN.

Of course, there's a slight possibility that others here might disagree with me. ;-)

Regards,
James

                              
I haven't thought this way...
Message #11 Posted by Vieira, Luiz C. (Brazil) on 19 Mar 2003, 3:58 p.m.,
in response to message #10 by James M. Prange

Hi, James;

you know what? Maybe you're right. I cannot say a word about learning RPL without knowing RPN because I simply cannot do it anymore.

HP mentioned in its own HP48 related brochures that RPL programming structure was a mix FORTH and LISP, not as a program listing, instead program functionality. I do not know FORTH and I read a few and tested something over LISP some (long) time ago, so I am not aware of how does a FORTH or LISP programmer feel when dealing with RPL.

Interesting point the one you mention.

Thank you.

Best regards.

Luiz C. Vieira - Brazil

                                    
Re: I haven't thought this way...
Message #12 Posted by James M. Prange on 19 Mar 2003, 8:37 p.m.,
in response to message #11 by Vieira, Luiz C. (Brazil)

Actually, all that I know of either Forth or Lisp is that I've read that RPL shares many features with each of them, so I imagine each of them to be sort of like RPL. Of course, cats and dogs are sort of like horses; they all come with four legs, want food, and need some cleaning up after.

Seriously, I don't think that either RPN or RPL is hard to learn. Well, at least enough for them to be very useful, if not enough to be considered an expert.

Perhaps the main difficulty is that if you already know one, you may not have as much motivation to learn the other.

                  
Re: I don't have ANY manuals yet...
Message #13 Posted by Chris Randle (UK) on 18 Mar 2003, 8:35 p.m.,
in response to message #3 by Jeremy

What was it about the 48GX that you disliked that will be different on the 48G?

                        
There were a number of factors...
Message #14 Posted by Jeremy on 19 Mar 2003, 12:30 a.m.,
in response to message #13 by Chris Randle (UK)

...and none of them particularly good ones.

1. I needed the money, and it was worth over $100 2. Trying to figure out how to do some things on it that were easy on my TI-85 was absolute hell. Once I figured them out, they were so counter-intuitive that I couldn't remember how to get there for the life of me. Those are bad things when you're under pressure and time crunch for tests. For example, I was led to believe that the HP48GX would do symbolic integration. It does, kind of, but try and remember how to do it! I sure couldn't. It is actually easier to do it by hand. 3. I didn't need the expandability. 32k is realistically more than I will probably use. That might change if I build the cable and start downloading programs for it...

Just about 20 minutes ago, I took delivery of a 48G I bought on eBay (with 'Buy it Now') for $40, including manuals. That is the positive side of the discontinuation of the RPN HPs. People are so busy overpaying for models like the 11C and the 32SII, that they are not noticing that a 48G can be snatched up so cheaply. It's got tons of functions, and even if you only use the basic scientific ones, it is a hell of a good deal, right? I kind of like being able to see the next few levels of the stack instead of having to remember what's in there. It's not a big deal, but it is nice when you're trying to work with some particularly nasty equations, right? It does lack the pocket size and the charm of the RPN machines, but it gets the job done HP-style and on a tight budget.

For the charm-factor, I have an hp 45 that I just bought and fixed up, which I'm absolutely delighted with... The hp LED display is absolutely top-shelf. But I'm getting of on an arctan here...

-Jeremy

PS - To sum it up concisely, it was not about choosing between a 48GX and a 48G, but between having BOTH a TI-85 and a 48GX instead of a TI-85 and $120. A couple of years later, I found myself missing the 48GX, but not the expansion. So here I am.

                              
Re: There were a number of factors...
Message #15 Posted by John K. (US) on 19 Mar 2003, 5:45 a.m.,
in response to message #14 by Jeremy

For US$40, a 48G is a great deal. For most things, I prefer the older 4-level stack RPN machines, but the 48/49 devices have some very nifty features. One of my current favorites is the ability to attach units to numbers and plug them into the SOLVE variables. The way that it converts units automagically within the app is just way too cool. And it has saved me more than a couple of times when I fat-fingered an equation. Heck, NASA probably wouldn't have lost the Mars Polar Lander if they'd been working their calculations with units on a 48G. ;^)

There may be other calculators out there that will do the same thing but if so, I don't know which ones.

                  
Re: I don't have ANY manuals yet...
Message #16 Posted by James M. Prange on 19 Mar 2003, 2:04 a.m.,
in response to message #3 by Jeremy

For your new 48G, I strongly recommend getting the "HP 48G Series Advanced User's Reference Manual".

In my opinion, The 48G Series User's Guide was a disappointment. But the CD-ROM set/DVD-ROM has the 48SX User's Manual and Programmer's Reference Manual; most of the information on the 48S series also applies to the 48G series.

Also note that there's a lot of information about RPL models available at http://www.hpcalc.org/

Regards,
James

                        
Thanks, I'll look into that.
Message #17 Posted by Jeremy on 19 Mar 2003, 8:52 a.m.,
in response to message #16 by James M. Prange

I had already discovered some good sites dedicated to the 48G. I was prompted to search when I read the part on this site that said something like: "..there are already plenty of websites dedicated to the 48G..."

I guess the first place I will start to look for the Advanced Users Reference will be HP, because their markup won't be so bad... If I'm lucky, they will have it as a free download, but I'm not crossing my fingers there.

-Jeremy

                              
Re: Thanks, I'll look into that.
Message #18 Posted by James M. Prange on 19 Mar 2003, 10:09 a.m.,
in response to message #17 by Jeremy

I doubt that HP will have a download (they didn't last time I checked).

Try:
http://www.calcpro.com/

      
Re: How about an 'RPN Excercises Page'?
Message #19 Posted by joe on 18 Mar 2003, 11:03 p.m.,
in response to message #1 by Jeremy

Would you please tell me more about that page? Where can I find it? I am new at RPN too, and would appreciate any help.

Thanks, joe

            
Here's the RPN page that is on the site already.
Message #20 Posted by Jeremy on 19 Mar 2003, 12:36 a.m.,
in response to message #19 by joe

You can find it in the menus on the right side of the main page, but here is a link to it directly from here:

Learn RPN Page

The page is very well done, and I have just printed it out today, so that I can carry it around and practice it when I have a free minute here and there. Once you get used to the new thought process, it really does make sense, and it really does come quickly.

-Jeremy

                  
Re: Here's the RPN page that is on the site already.
Message #21 Posted by joe on 19 Mar 2003, 8:50 a.m.,
in response to message #20 by Jeremy

Thank you very much...

      
Re: How about an 'RPN Excercises Page'?
Message #22 Posted by Michael F. Coyle on 18 Mar 2003, 11:51 p.m.,
in response to message #1 by Jeremy

Sound like a good idea. I'd be glad to volunteer, but I can't do it alone. Maybe if one or two other people get on board we could get something done quickly.

But I just had another thought. Maybe it would be a better idea to just recommend that folks new to RPN buy the CD-ROMs and learn from the original manuals.

Thoughts, anyone?

- Michael

            
Re: How about an 'RPN Excercises Page'?
Message #23 Posted by Vieira, Luiz C. (Brazil) on 19 Mar 2003, 12:49 a.m.,
in response to message #22 by Michael F. Coyle

Hi;

I mentioned this possibility in my first post at this very thread, but my only concerns are related to the different resources from one model to the other. I believe a "starting" or "reference" point would be a good choice for those who bought or recover a vintage/earlier RPN model and want to go further. If you have an HP10C and want to follow the examples available in the HP67 manual, chances are you'll miss the R^ (roll-up) function/key. In this case, the best vintage manual would be the HP25 User's Manual, so you can follow almost all examples as is.

The Learn RPN Page is already copied (as all MoHPC contents) in the CD's. I think an RPN tutorial in the CD is a very good idea, indeed. The Learn RPN Page is dedicated to show how does RPN work, and is not particularly focussed in key sequences or in a specific model. This is very important.

I'll prepare something and allow others to look and "taste".

Best regards.

Luiz V. Vieira - Brazil

                  
Re: How about an 'RPN Excercises Page'?
Message #24 Posted by Michael F. Coyle on 19 Mar 2003, 8:56 p.m.,
in response to message #23 by Vieira, Luiz C. (Brazil)

Hi Luiz!

You wrote, concerning using vintage HP manuals: ...my only concerns are related to the different resources from one model to the other. I believe a "starting" or "reference" point would be a good choice for those who bought or recover a vintage/earlier RPN model and want to go further.

I agree. I think our target audience is people who have no RPN experience who want to become proficient.

If you have an HP10C and want to follow the examples available in the HP67 manual, chances are you'll miss the R^ (roll-up) function/key.

I was suggesting that a new owner of an old calculator get the MoHPC CD set. That way, they could learn from the correct manual and this would not be an issue. (I think the CDs have all the old manuals.)

Even with the CDs, I think there is still room for a detailed RPN tutorial. It could cover many topics in more detail than the original manual, not just explaining what the features are, but why they work the way they do, and how to use them to their best advantage.

The problem here is that if say, half the calculators have R^ and the other half don't, and you want to write a "generic" RPN manual, how do you do it? My ideas are below. (And I agree with you, the RPN tutorial on this site is good, and it's good that it's generic.)

In this case, the best vintage manual would be the HP25 User's Manual, so you can follow almost all examples as is.

The HP-25 manual is terrific but the 25 has no R^!!!

Anyway, let's take a step back. As I see it, there are three main types of RPN in use:
Classic RPN, like on the HP-25 (I'll call this "25-style.")
HP-41 RPN, like 25-style but with many more stack manipulations possible. (Call it "41-style.")
RPL, like on the HP-48, 49. (Call it "RPL" or "48-style.")

I think a tutorial that tried to present optimum examples that work with all three styles of RPN would be too complex and would fail. I think we should concentrate on 25-style RPN and not worry for now if the examples work on the other machine. (Exception: first introductory chapter should not cover any advanced material and should be so generic that it will work on any calculator.)

I think the feature set we should have in mind is that of the HP-25, that is, 4 basic functions [+][-][*][/], [ENTER^], [CHS], [EEX], [CLx], [x<>y], [R dn], and scientific functions as needed. Perhaps also a display mode command so the user's display can match the the tutorial's.

To deal with R^, we might present the answers with and without R^:

Example: compute ...<something>...
Solution: ...<series of keystrokes>...
If your calculator has [R^], you can save two keystrokes:
...<series of keystrokes>...

Since only a small number of examples would benefit from R^, the text would not become too cluttered.

Now it is true that every calculator has its own little quirks. Prehaps the best way to deal with this is to add a chapter at the end with notes for each specific calculator. For example, the notes for the HP-35 would mention the odd CHS behavior and the fact that trig functions erase the value of T.

If you want, I can write up some sample text. And I'd be glad to look at what you come up with.

- Michael

                        
Here's a sample, Luiz
Message #25 Posted by Michael F. Coyle on 19 Mar 2003, 11:21 p.m.,
in response to message #24 by Michael F. Coyle

Hi Luiz!

As an example of what I have in mind, I've written the section for everybody's favorite function, [%]. It has been lightly formatted and so is presented as preformatted text.

Am I on the right track here, do you think?

Anyone's comments welcome.

- Michael

=====================================================
(title) % Is A Little Different

The [%] function is similar to the other 2-number functions.  First
key in your base amount, then the desired percent rate, then press [%].
The display now shows the percentage of the base amount.

Example: What is 15% of 45?
Solution: 45 [ENTER^] 15 [%]   (Answer: 6.7500)

Example: A 68 Ohm resistor is available with four different tolerances:
20%, 10%, 5%, and 1%.  How much resistance does each tolerance
correspond to?
Solution:
68 [ENTER^] 20 [%]   (Answer: 13.6000 Ohms)
68 [ENTER^] 10 [%]   (Answer:  6.8000 Ohms)
68 [ENTER^]  5 [%]   (Answer:  3.4000 Ohms)
68 [ENTER^]  1 [%]   (Answer:  0.6800 Ohms)

The computation performed is: y % x = (y*x)/100

Now here's the part that's different.  As you know, all other 2-number
functions operate by removing both numbers from the stack, performing
the operation, and returning the result to the stack.  After the
operation, both original numbers are gone.  (But the number in the X
register just before the operation was performed can be retrieved with
[LAST x].)

But the [%] function does not work this way.  Only the second number
is taken off the stack; the base amount (in the Y register) remains.
The original contents of the X register (the percent rate) is
replaced by the calculated percentage.

Why does [%] work this way?  Well, the most common percentage
calculation is to take a base amount and add or subtract the
percentage to get a net amount.  This is how we can calculate markups,
discounts, and taxes.  Having the [%] function preserve
the base amount on the stack simplifies this kind of calculation --
you don't have to key in the base amount a second time.

The following examples use amounts in U.S. Dollars ($).  Set your
calculator to display 2 decimal places: [FIX] 2

Example: A shopkeeper wants to raise the price of a $5 battery by 25%.
What is the price increase?  What is the new price?
Solution: 5 [ENTER^] 25 [%]   (Answer: $1.25 price increase)
          [+]                 (Answer: $6.25 is the new price)

Example: A cell phone manufacturer reduces the price of a $50 phone
by 18%.  What is the price decrease?  What is the new price?
Solution: 50 [ENTER^] 18 [%]   (Answer: phone costs $9.00 less)
          [-]                  (Answer: the new price is $41.00)

Let's look at the stack for the last example:

T  0.00                 0.00      0.00      0.00
Z  0.00                 0.00      0.00      0.00
Y  0.00                50.00     50.00      0.00
X  0.00                18.00      9.00     41.00
        50 [ENTER^] 18       [%]       [-]

Notice how the base amount, $50.00, is still on the stack after the [%]
operation.

We can also use [%] to perform chain calculations:

Example: A store is running a clearance sale -- every item in the store
is being discounted by 30%.  If the store normally sells the HP-48GX
for $120, what is the discounted cost?  What will the customer pay if a
7.5% sales tax is in effect?
Solution: 120 [ENTER^] 30 [%]   (Answer: calculator costs $36.00 less
now)
          [-]                   (Answer: the sale price is $84.00)
          7.5 [%]               (Answer: sales tax is $6.30)
          [+]                   (Answer: customer pays $90.30)

One last point: If you are just calculating straight percentages and
aren't interested in the base amount, keep in mind that the base
amount is still there anyway.  You may wish to discard it.

Excercises:
... (None yet.  Would be similar to examples.  Answers at the back
of the book.) ...

Notes:
1. [Delta %] also leaves its first operand on the stack.  But unlike
[%], I can't think of any reason why this might be useful.

2. Unlike the classic RPN calculators, the HP-48's [%] operation
removes both numbers from the stack and just returns its one result.
If you need the base amount for the next calculation, you must
duplicate it before you do the [%].  This makes the calculations shown
above more difficult on the HP-48.  Exercise for HP-48 owners: write
a program 'MY%' that calculates the percentage but preserves the base
amount as described above.

(Solution: << SWAP DUP ROT % >> 'MY%' STO)
                              
Re: Here's a sample, Luiz
Message #26 Posted by Vieira, Luiz C. (Brazil) on 20 Mar 2003, 11:07 a.m.,
in response to message #25 by Michael F. Coyle

Hello, Michael;

I sent you an e-mail with an attached file.

Did you get it?

best regards.

Luiz C. Vieira - Brazil

                                    
Yes, I got it
Message #27 Posted by Michael F. Coyle on 20 Mar 2003, 1:59 p.m.,
in response to message #26 by Vieira, Luiz C. (Brazil)

Hi Luiz,

Your PDF page looks very good! I like the calculator key symbols.

I notice you show sample keystrokes and displays from several calculators. This is nice. But I thought one of the ideas here was to make the document "generic", that is, not specific to any one calculator. I think this may mean that we should not show shift keys since they are always specific to each model. (Example: squart root is unshifted on some machines, gold-shifted on others, and blue-shifted on yet others.) We would probably have to write something about shifting in general and encourage the user to look at his own calculator to find out how to evoke each function. Since this just amounts to matching the function color to the shift key color, I don't think it's too much to ask.

As I look at this, it's looking like a bigger project than I anticipated. Writing the text is not hard, but tedious. Coming up with lots of examples and exercises will be hard work. It might be nice to get one or two others on board.

As for credit, I would have to insist that if we do the work, we should get the credit. I'm sure Dave will understand. If worst comes to worst we might have to host it on another site and just link to it from the museum site. I don't think it will come to that, though.

Other than that, good job!

Some questions. What do you think of the content of what I've written? Is it at the right experience level? Is there any slang or idiomatic usage that a foreigner might have difficulty with? (If so, I will rewrite.) Will using American dollars as a currency in the examples upset anyone?

Should we continue this in the forum or take it off-line? I'd prefer this to be a public exercise if possible.

Talk to you soon.

- Michael

                                          
Re: Yes, I got it
Message #28 Posted by Vieira, Luiz C. (Brazil) on 20 Mar 2003, 2:29 p.m.,
in response to message #27 by Michael F. Coyle

Hi, Michael;

we can (and must) continue this subject as a public one. The reason I sent you the PDF was that it's not yet finished, and I intend allowing it to be downloaded after removing as many "bugs" as possible. See, I justified all display contents to the right, and they must be all left-justified.

I used many calculator layouts because I have no idea about what is the user see when experiencing the examples. If I use a Voyager-like LCD character set, maybe Vintage owners will believe it's not for them. I just thought about a better, perhaps fancy look when using specific character set for the display. Maybe it's not exactly a good idea. That's the same for prefixed functions.

As the example deals with the same subject - percentage computations - I thought that using different "calculator environments" would be nice, too.

About US currency. I see no problem at all, mostly because world wide market is based in Euro and Dollar nowadays. Other currency are also used, but these two are mentioned constantly. I do not think anyone in here will complain, though.

I'll finish the "paper" and allow it to be downlaoded. if needed, I'll start a new thread asking for comments and suggestions. And believe me, this is something almost everyone in here will love to see and work through, and many new ideas and suggestions will happen. I think you have shown everything that can be done with [%] function, if I am not wrong. Later, when others see the PDF and suggest over it, we'll see the particular view from each one.

Best regards and thank you.

Luiz C. Vieira - Brazil

      
Re: How about an 'RPN Excercises' ARTICLE?
Message #29 Posted by Paul Brogger on 19 Mar 2003, 2:00 p.m.,
in response to message #1 by Jeremy

I haven't read every post in response, so this may have been suggested already:

How about drafting an RPN "Article" for the MoHPC Articles Forum? There will be no shortage of volunteers for editing, review and contribution. Once the material is gathered in one place, Dave Hick might then elect to "elevate" that article to a page in its own right, or to link to the article from the MoHPC RPN page.

(Mining the MoHPC Forum Archives for RPN-related topics and challenges would be where I'd start . . .)

            
RPN Book
Message #30 Posted by Chan Tran on 20 Mar 2003, 7:26 p.m.,
in response to message #29 by Paul Brogger

I got here the HP32E manual. It doesn't cover RPN at all but rather refers to the book "Solving Problems With Your HP Calculator". I remember now that was the book that covered RPN in general. The book came with the Spice series. I wonder anyone here have a copy?

                  
Re: RPN Book
Message #31 Posted by Karl Schneider on 20 Mar 2003, 11:33 p.m.,
in response to message #30 by Chan Tran

Chan --

Excellent suggestion!

Yes, I have two copies of "Solving Problems With Your HP Calculator", received with two HP-34C's I got on eBay auctions. It's 55 pages long, well-illustrated -- the way they used to be. A nice little book, with ID 5955-5267 (Rev. B 8/80).

I'm not sure if it has been scanned on the MoHPC CD-ROM/DVD-ROM set, and I don't have a modern scanner.

                        
Re: RPN Book -- Apparently on CD 6
Message #32 Posted by Paul Brogger on 21 Mar 2003, 5:37 p.m.,
in response to message #31 by Karl Schneider

The "Manuals on CD" page lists "Solving Problems ..." as being on CD # 6.

            
Re: How about an 'RPN Excercises' ARTICLE?
Message #33 Posted by Ed Martin on 20 Mar 2003, 10:23 p.m.,
in response to message #29 by Paul Brogger

This is an excellent idea, and one of the best threads I have seen (out of quite a few good ones).

What would be great is for someone to develop an outline for this article, then people could contribute to the various sections (each section could even have a thread of its own). I personally don't feel qualified to put together the outline, but I'm sure several of the MoHPC contributors are.

- Ed

[ Return to Index | Top of Index ]

Go back to the main exhibit hall