Path: utzoo!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!usc!snorkelwacker.mit.edu!stanford.edu!cascade.stanford.edu!dolores!bob
From: bob@dolores.Stanford.EDU (Bob Lodenkamper)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.handhelds
Subject: Re: RPN intuitive?
Message-ID: <BOB.91Mar11202926@dolores.Stanford.EDU>
Date: 12 Mar 91 04:29:26 GMT
References: <7645@mentor.cc.purdue.edu>
	<BOB.91Mar11161503@dolores.Stanford.EDU> <1991Mar12.014121.925@csn.org>
Sender: news@cascade.Stanford.EDU (USENET News System)
Organization: Center for Integrated Systems, Stanford University
Lines: 39
In-Reply-To: frechett@spot.Colorado.EDU's message of 12 Mar 91 01:41:21 GMT

In article <1991Mar12.014121.925@csn.org> frechett@spot.Colorado.EDU (-=Runaway Daemon=-) writes:

   In article <BOB.91Mar11161503@dolores.Stanford.EDU> bob@dolores.Stanford.EDU (Bob Lodenkamper) writes:
   >In article <7645@mentor.cc.purdue.edu> ahernsd@mentor.cc.purdue.edu (Dynastar) writes:
   >   only one in the world who feels that RPN is the intuitively
   >   obvous way of doing things?
   >
   >It not intuitively obvious at all, but once RPN is burned into the
   You don't think that RPN is intuitively obvious.. Think about the
   way that you do operations on a piece of paper.  Do you arrange the
   numbers in some logical format and then apply the operation to it?
   Or do you look at the first number only and then the operation and
   somehow apply that operation to the next number which you don't
   know yet?  The latter is what normal algebraic calcs are really
   trying to do.  Looking back on it, I find that it really isn't very
   easy to think like that.. I found that when I used algebraic entry
   that I many times have to write it all down on paper so that I
   don't get order of operations all messed up.  Also consider that
   when you do work on a CASIO or some such that
   you have either have to write down your scratch work alot, or make extensive
   use of the ONE memory location so that you can use your results later.
   On an RPN machine however, you can just leave your scratch work on the stack
   and pick it out and use it whenever you want.. 
   I think that it is much more intuitive.  It is how my brain works.
   What would you think if you were brought up on RPN and then
   switched over to an algebraic calc?

I failed to include the obligatory "your mileage may vary."  Oops.
Since I find it impossible to use algebraic calculators having used
RPN, I must grant the ability of RPN patterns to displace algebraic,
but in my pre-HP days I certainly was able to get things done on an
algebraic calculator.  Either will work, depending on what one is used
to... Remember the older RPN calculators only displayed the x
register, and I see little difference between having to remember
what's on the stack and putting in all the silly parentheses required
by an algebraic calculator.  The 4 line display may be the single most
useful innovation introduced in the 28.

- Bob