This seems off: >> f(x) = x^2 >> f''(4) 0.9995297887
Oh yeah, derivatives of higher order being less accurate is a known problem. I forgot to specify that, thanks!
Ignoring these, I really like Kalk!
21–30 of 90 posts
This seems off: >> f(x) = x^2 >> f''(4) 0.9995297887
Oh yeah, derivatives of higher order being less accurate is a known problem. I forgot to specify that, thanks!
Ignoring these, I really like Kalk!
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Oh yeah, derivatives of higher order being less accurate is a known problem. I forgot to specify that, thanks!
Maybe best to just disable it for now, I played with e^x as well and the results were off as well. Ignoring these, I really like Kalk!
kalk is a calculator that has syntax highlighting, automatically turns names into symbols (eg. sqrt to √), supports math-like syntax (eg. f(x) = x(2sinx + 3) , estimation of derivatives and integrals, complex numbers, and runs in the browser using WebAssembly.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Maybe best to just disable it for now, I played with e^x as well and the results were off as well. Ignoring these, I really like Kalk!
Thank you! Yeah, or at least give a warning.
kalk is a calculator that has syntax highlighting, automatically turns names into symbols (eg. sqrt to √), supports math-like syntax (eg. f(x) = x(2sinx + 3) , estimation of derivatives and integrals, complex numbers, and runs in the browser using WebAssembly.
Congrats! I write calculators myself from time to time, but this sounds very impressive :) How was your experience using webassembly? Any good guides that helped you with that part?
As they say, "the answer will surprise you" :)
Nice work btw!
For fun, try to run this: `2 + 2 * 10%` in all calculators you have access to: on you phone, on your desktop, in kalk. As they say, "the answer will surprise you" :)
2 + 2 × 10% = 2.2
At the risk of admitting my ignorance, yet more interested in learning something new: should this answer (2.2) surprise me?Earlier quoted context omitted.
Congrats! I write calculators myself from time to time, but this sounds very impressive :) How was your experience using webassembly? Any good guides that helped you with that part?
It was actually surprisingly seamless with Rust. "wasmpack" pretty much did it all for me. I added some attributes (well, whatever they're called in Rust) to function and struct declaration to show that bindings should be generated for these things, and from that wasmpack could generate JavaScript bindings! Unfortunately I was slightly limited by some libraries not working with WebAssembly, but I got around that fair…