Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

SpeedCrunch

speedcrunch.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–138 of 138 posts

Re: SpeedCrunch

#131

Post by commoner »

sbuttgereit wrote: post #127
Measter wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not even calculators agree on this. Here's a picture of my Casio fx-83ES and fx-83GT calculators giving different answers to "8/2(2+2)": https://i.imgur.com/SsKUQrE.jpg Both answers are completely, 100% correct according to the operator precedence table in their manuals. I also have a Casio fx-83MS and fx-991ES, both give 1 as the answer. Others I have are a Casio fx-570CD and a Casio statistical calculator I don't r…

Looking at this issue and then trying Qalculate! as some of the other commenters to this post have mentioned.... I tried 1/2(-9.8) and it calculated it as -0.05102040816 as I was doing the entry. As soon as I hit enter, however, it popped open a dialog box saying "The expression is ambiguous" and asked me to select an interpretation of expressions with implicit multiplication, setting a preference for later use. The…

That's the perfect way to deal with this case. I've been using Qalculate! for quite some time, but never saw this dialog because I've apparently never entered an ambiguous expression before. Thanks for sharing this.

Re: SpeedCrunch

#132

Post by seanw444 »

jsilence wrote: post #120
jcfrei wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I use calc as well, especially practical in combination with guake ( a drop-down quake style console: https://github.com/Guake/guake ).

Is there a way to start Emacs in full window calc mode?

If I remember right:

  emacs -f full-calc

Re: SpeedCrunch

#133

Post by kragen »

TchoBeer wrote: post #119
kragen wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You could make 1/2x where x = 4 evaluate to either 2 or 0.125, but either choice will have surprising results in some cases or to some people. Perhaps a better choice, especially for an interactive calculator, is to adopt partially ordered operator precedence, and reject the expression as ambiguous. Then the user can insert parentheses to disambiguate. In a CFG this is easy enough to express. Here's an untested and a…

The solution is to differentiate between 2*x and 2x. / would have higher priority than *, but lower priority than conjunction

That is a thing you can do, and for example units(1) does just that, but doing it creates the usability problems we are discussing in its thread. My comment is aimed at solving those problems, not worsening them.

Re: SpeedCrunch

#134

Post by dan-robertson »

JoshTriplett wrote: post #21
dan-robertson wrote: post #14

Their demo of their efficient interface compared to GNU Calc: SC: 5+8 Enter [4 keys, 1 shift] Calc: 5 RET 8 + [4 keys, 1 shift] SC: 5*(113+23) Enter [11 keys, 3 shifts] Calc: 5 RET 113 RET 23 + * [10 keys, 1 shift] SC: 7*ans Enter [6 keys, 1 shift] Calc: 7 * [2 keys, 1 shift] SC: sqrt(1231+41) Enter [14 keys, 3 shift] Calc: 1231 RET 41 + Q [9 keys, 1 shift] Maybe it’s more efficient than clicking buttons with a mouse…

You're comparing infix with RPN. There are more factors there than just number of keystrokes; not everyone enjoys working with RPN or finds it comfortable. RPN is a deliberate tradeoff in favor of speed/efficiency at the expense of other things.

The calculator I used in school was infix but, unlike this calculator, had:

- single buttons for common operations like +, * or sqrt

- no shifted parentheses

- display-style input of fractions and exponential so you got some visual clue if your brackets weren’t totally wrong

- single (sometimes shifted) buttons for functions like cos/tan/arcsin/…

- specialised shift operators which mostly meant inverse or hyperbolic

GNU Calc has most of these (+ and * are still shifted but all common operations are shifted. Parentheses are not used because of RPN. Display-style (‘big’) presentation is optional but ugly ascii art. Press H for hyperbolic, I for inverse).

I think gnu Calc is lacking a bit in entry of algebraic expressions but I don’t think speed crunch is better. I’d like to see something that let you place a ‘(‘ somewhere ‘backwards’, or in other words a feature for ‘I would like to parenthetical use some of the past expressions. Please let me interactively choose them without fiddling with cursor movement commands.’

Re: SpeedCrunch

#135

Post by NavinF »

Jerrrry wrote: post #57
commoner wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, that answer is incorrect since it breaks with calculator conventions. The contents of the parentheses are calculated first (P in PEMDAS), and then the multiplication is done later (MD in PEMDAS). Implicit multiplication (which does not explicitly use a multiplication sign) has the same priority as any other multiplication: a/b(c) = a/b*c = (a/b)*c Since SpeedCrunch only accepts input in a single line, this would…

÷ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Division_sign avoids this entirely. or if you wanna be really fkn nerdy: ∕, instead of /

Nobody uses that symbol after grade school.

Re: SpeedCrunch

#137

Post by morpheuskafka »

dron57 wrote: post #110
morpheuskafka wrote: post #33

I loved this on Windows but haven't used it since switching to macOS since it seems to not support Retina screens very well, anyone know of a workaround?

The fix for this is detailed in this thread: https://bitbucket.org/heldercorreia/speedcrunch/issues/716/v... And the .dmg file that has the retina fix is here: https://github.com/gagarcr/speedcrunch-nightlies/releases Hopefully this helps!

Thank you! Works great on M1 under Rosetta too. Glad to see this app is still usable on the latest macOS after all.

Re: SpeedCrunch

#138

Post by Semiapies »

I wanted to like this, but when I tried it on Windows, setting the font size and/or color theme made the input bar/expression editor disappear. Absolutely nothing would bring it back, not changing the settings back or even uninstalling and reinstalling. I assume it works better in a linux.

(I'd report a bug, but a calculator program making itself unusable in less than a minute with steps I can't precisely recreate kinda kills my enthusiasm for that process.)

Post reply on HN