8 Jan
2014
8 Jan
'14
1:04 p.m.
-----Original Message-----
From: cctalk-bounces at classiccmp.org [mailto:cctalk-
bounces at classiccmp.org] On Behalf Of Tony Duell
Sent: Monday, January 06, 2014 1:14 PM
To: cctalk at classiccmp.org
Subject: Re: cctalk Digest, Vol 125, Issue 13
When my daughter started doing serious math in school, I bought her an HP-48SX. I had
already introduced her to RPN on my 48 (which I bought when I did my Masters) and she
'got it' right off. She finds the inside-out way of evaluating algebraically
expressed equations to be intuitive and less error-prone. And she loves to show off her
48 to her teachers, many of whom are too young to have been part of the generation when
RPN and algebraic were truly head-to-head.
By the way, she'll be 14 in ten days. She's a straight-A student in math (and
other subjects). I'll leave the chicken-and-egg argument as an exercise for the
student. -- Ian
Even though I agree that RPN calculators are
superior to algebraic
ones, I think that Ken's message was thoroughly condescending and rude.
RPN vs algebraic is a matter of opinion, not a law of nature or an
indicator of personal worth.
I wonder if part of it is confusing 'Easy to learn' with 'Easy to use'
The two are not the same. And which is more important depends on you, the
problem , and how many tiems you will have to solve it.
I will agree that in a sense RPN calculators are not 'easy to learn'.
You odn't just read a normal maths expression and press the keys in the
same order. You have to think about it.
But they are easy to use in that once you know how to use one, you don't
have to worry about the order that the machine will do operations, you don't
have to worry whether or not you need brackets, and so on. The machie
nalways behaves the same way.
And for me (and jsut about everyone elase I know), that is important. The
time taken to learn RPN is regaiend many times over in not having to think
aobut the machine rahter than the problem.