Olin Lathrop wrote:
>> FWIW, I don't use RPN. Does it mean my brain doesn't have the
>> engineering bent?
>
> But have you actually tried it and given it a reasonable chance?

No, I haven't. I don't even think I've ever seen anyone use it. After
re-reading Russell's statement, I see that I misread it the first time.


> [...] I got my first job out of school at HP, and of course was issued a
> HP
> calculator.  It took a few days to get used to, but once I was proficient
> at
> both there was no comparison.  Reverse Polish, despite the stupid name,
> was
> definitely better.

I've got no qualms with the name. I even use a variation of Hungarian
notation when programming for Windows. :)


> I don't think I've run into anyone that has actually given RPN a real try
> that didn't prefer it.  The corrolary is that the people that say RPN is
> too
> cumbersome or doesn't make sense haven't tried it.  There is a lot of
> green
> eggs and ham mentality going on.  People are comfortable with what they
> know
> and feel threatened by what they don't, so they dismiss it as inferior
> without any real basis in fact.

I don't think I would describe it as "threatened", but I will admit that
when I compare the perceived benefit to the perceived cost (cost of RPN
calculator, learning curve) I don't really see the point.

I normally use my TI-89, which gives me the benefit of being able to go back
and edit an expression, as well as write programs (sometimes rather
complicated) to automate certain calculations. Lately, I've been using
Google as a calculator. Excel can also be useful sometimes.

Can you give me an example when RPN would be superior?

Vitaliy

-- 
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist