Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
News

Seeking a Simple Programmer's Calculator? 124

Posted by Cliff from the just-what-I-need-not-what-I-don't dept.
jbum asks: "One day I'm going to lose my trusty mid-80s calculator, so help me find a new one that doesn't suck! I've been using the same calculator since the mid 80s. It's a Casio CM-100 'Computer Math Calc,' and if you lookup the name on Usenet/Goggle News or even here on Slashdot, you'll find a small number of lucky (but older) programmers singing its praises. Sadly, it hasn't been manufactured in years. Here's a picture. Has anyone found a calculator that is currently being manufactured which is remotely appropriate for programmers rather than scientists/engineers?"

"The CM-100 was solar powered, it was cheap at the time - maybe 20 bucks, and most importantly, it's simple. It does what I want (mostly hex/bin/oct/dec conversions and the occasional shift or rotate) it doesn't do what I don't want (scientific calculations and trig). It makes good assumptions about operator precedence - it does the right thing if you type 1+2*3, but you can also use parens if you choose. It doesn't try to be clever with the display (such as displaying the input in a tiny font on a different line) or pack in a whole lot of extra functionality I don't need.

Every calculator I have bought since the early 90s has been much, much worse, primarily because they are trying to be too general purpose. They pack too much functionality in, they have sucky interfaces, they add the hex conversion as an afterthought and make me use a shift key to get to it. They don't put A,B,C,D,E,F on separate buttons as they should be and so on.

Last month on a business-trip I had my briefcase stolen. It contained my passport and some other important documents. But I went crazy thinking that I had lost my calculator. When I returned from the trip, I found I had absent-mindedly left it buried on my desk and was hugely relieved. The passport is replaceable, but the calculator may not be. If I had lost the calculator, I probably would have been prepared to pay $400 to replace it, but probably wouldn't have been able to find one. According to e-Bay, no one has ever sold one there.

Nonetheless, the time will come when I will lose my trusty little calculator for good. Then I'll have to replace it. Plus, I'd like another calculator to keep at home."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Seeking a Simple Programmer's Calculator? More

Seeking a Simple Programmer's Calculator?

Comments Filter:
  • .. hates this calculator. Every time she picks up its in hex or binary mode and she can't figure it out.

    ha.

    Wonder if there's an emulation?

  • bc (Score:2, Informative)

    by tachyonflow ( 539926 )
    I find the 'bc' program to be pretty handy. It will do arithmetic, binary/hex/decimal base calculations, etc. (For those who like reverse polish notation, maybe 'dc' would work better.)

    example doing a base conversion:

    $ bc
    bc 1.05
    Copyright 1991, 1992, 1993, 1994, 1997, 1998 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
    This is free software with ABSOLUTELY NO WARRANTY.
    For details type `warranty'.
    obase=16
    ibase=2
    10101010
    AA
    • Dc has a lot more going for it than just reverse polish notation.

      Its best feature is extremely terse notation. Most of its operators are a single character (ones involving a register are two or three). Whitespace is rarely necessary. Here is your example in dc:

      $ dc 16o2i10101010p AA Dc also has great macro facilities. Here is code to calculate the 1000th Fibonacci number: 2se1 1[dsx+lxrle1+dse1000>p]dspxp.

      Only 34 keystrokes needed! Here is another fun bit of dc code: [91aPdP93aPp]91aPdP93aPp . Here is more:

      035 070 084 078 070 084 109 035 047 088 080 102 088 095 088 107 035 070 090 078 063 084 087 070 090 035 020 048 086 080 102 086 095 086 107 063 090 102 109 078 063 090 087 035 020 048 088 080 102 088 095 088 107 102 109 253 078 036 035 084 067 080 102 101 035 070 090 036 102 100 078 087 087 070 090 036 035 035 034 039 043 030 084 067 087 036 035 035 024 036 035 034 039 043 030 084 067 036 035 024 039 043 030 084 067 038 037 084 067 095 100 087 036 030 037 035 024 102 100 035 048 101 109 035 047 085 080 102 085 095 085 107 253 095 088 107 102 109 253 078 036 038 030 037 040 041 024 084 067 109 035 047 087 080 102 087 095 087 107 253 0Sa[Saz0

  • Palm OS (Score:2, Informative)

    by ResHippie ( 105522 )
    I have an older Handspring Visor, the advanced version of the built in calculator seems like it would do what you want it to. Under the "Logic" setting you can do all sorts of base conversions, as well as Logical Right and Left shifts.

    Granted getting a Palm just for use as a calculator is a bit much, but I figure most geeks have one anyway.
    • Well, I'd be fully prepared to sell him my Visor Deluxe for $350.
    • Yep.. A palm 100/105 is 'only' ~$100, and you can get some pretty decent calculator programs -- Including programmable ones (i.e. you can redesign the calculator to suit your preferences). I'm pretty sure that they've got at least one programmer's calculator in the stack (of available calculator programs).

      And if you don't like what's available, you can always roll your own (you are a programmer, aren't you?).

  • Is this the new Slashdot? (Score:1, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward
    I see Slashdot now has a "want ads" section. Since we're here, I'm wondering if anyone has an 8" floppy drive they'd be willing to part with.
  • I don't know any physical calulators. I prefer a good software calculator that allows copy and paste.

    I couldn't find one that did everything I wanted (mostly hex and binary in a sane fashion) so I wrote one [ostermiller.org]. Its written in JavaScript, so it runs in your web browser (I always have mine open anyway). It has a bookmarklet so you can open it in a window that is sized nicely. It makes my life a lot easier.

    • Heh. I tried your calculater. Try putting something like

      5 * 8 / PI

      and then hit = or 'Popup Calculator'

      in it, and watch it crash and burn.
      (respectively, Javascript error on line 71 and 541)

      Using IE 5.5 on Win...
      • Internet Explorer has severe problems with it right now. Use Mozilla. (It used to work in IE, I hadn't tested it for a while though.)
        • I fixed it so it works with IE. If you are interested:
          1. Internet Explorer does not support [^] to mean any character at all in regular expressions, it gives a parse error. I had to replace that with (?:[a]|[^a]). (Note I don't want to use . as that does not include new lines.)
          2. Internet explorer does not support spaces in the name of a window. I had been appending the date the the name of the window for the popup to give a new window each time (I want multiple calculators). Since a date contains spaces, it failed. I had to take the spaces out of the date.
          Microsoft: fix these bugs! Since you (Microsoft) don't have a public bug database like Bugzilla, I'm reporting them here.
    • Great programming job there. I never knew 1 + 1 = Runtime Error!
  • I will probably be modded "-1, Troll" for this, but here goes...

    I set my Windows Calculator to "Scientific" mode and then I can easily do calculations in hex or binary, easy to convert between bases, etc. Probably doesn't do everything you want, but it's useful for me when I'm figuring out subnets and such.

  • CFX-9850G (Score:3, Offtopic)

    by brejc8 ( 223089 ) on Wednesday September 04, 2002 @05:04PM (#4197121) Homepage Journal
    The CFX-9850G [ucf.edu] is one I use all te time. The batteries last for years even thoug they are rechargeable. It has a nice BASIC like programming language, a serial port for communicating with a pc or other calcs. And there are millions of programs available on the intraweb to try out.
  • There are a couple (old model) HP 16C calculators being sold on ebay right now. Other than "RPN ain't my style" and "long since discontinued", I've never heard anything bad about the 16C. But old HP's have their fans, and they don't sell cheap.

    There's more info on 16C's at www.hpmuseum.org, supposedly including a MS Windows simulation of one.
    • The 16C was great but during its peak popularity, it had one flaw, it's ugly programmability. After using the 41C with its alphanumeric display, it was hard to go back to label addressing representation.

      I realize I was spoiled, but there was a time when HP calculators would always build on the capabilities of previous versions and this was a step backwards.

  • As some else suggested, an older HP calculator. Found here [ebay.com]. So far, no bids!

  • He said KISS (Score:3, Insightful)

    by rw2 ( 17419 ) on Wednesday September 04, 2002 @05:10PM (#4197159) Homepage
    Let me, since the first handful of posters seem to have forgotten, reiterate that the person asking the question wanted something simple! Not an app on a desktop that he can't fit in a briefcase, not a graphing calculator but an available calculator that is just like the one he has.

    Yes, I like my TI-89, but that's not what this dude is asking for!

    • Re:He said KISS (Score:3, Informative)

      by Webmoth ( 75878 )
      Just went to Casio's website. They've got a couple that will do computer math, but they also do a lot more. Not that you need more, but at least they aren't a big, honking graphing calc that you can't fit in your shirt pocket, and they aren't clunky software that you gotta lug a laptop around to use.

      A specialized calc may be hard to come by, especially from the big boys (Sharp, TI, Casio).
      • Simple and Handheld are the keywords here...

        Compared to the CM-100, the new casios are incredibly awful for my purposes. Lots of shifts needed to do hex conversions, and no dedicated A-F keys. They were clearly designed by a different person who wasn't actually planning on using the thing.

        Computer-emulated calculators suck. I like having something I can hold in my hand with buttons.

        The palm-pilot emulators are okay (and may be my best choice) but still not as tactile nor as simple as I would like.

        - jbum
        • Compared to the CM-100, the new casios are incredibly awful for my purposes. Lots of shifts needed to do hex conversions, and no dedicated A-F keys. They were clearly designed by a different person who wasn't actually planning on using the thing.

          Damn straight. Nearly all of them require you to type in an expression and evaluate it, which makes using them a complete pain.

          I have a FX451M. I love it. It's ancient and falling to pieces; the battery went long ago, and the solar panel isn't sufficient to trigger the reset circuitry, so every time I need to use it I have to get it out of base 14.5 or whatever the confused circuitry has decided to put it in this time, and the hinge is going so that the buttons on the right half of it only work if I press a certain place on the case.

          So I want to replace it. I had a look at Casio's current selection [casio.co.uk]. Every single one uses expression evaluation, which makes 'em useless for my purpose. I don't want a pocket computer. I want a calculator.

          My FX451 is small, simple, flexible, powerful, and I know it so well that I can think with it. It's got the four bases I commonly use, it's got all the logical operations I commonly use, it's a scientific calculator, it does unit conversions (saving me from remembering how many bloody millimetres there are in an inch this year), it's got a decent set of scientific constants, and everything is two keypresses away. (The FX451 is wallet-shaped, with lots of extra buttons on the right half of the wallet, so it doesn't use the shift key much.) It's so well designed you don't need a manual to work it, and I'd like to see you try that on a modern calculator.

          Since I can't replace it, I've been seriously considering reboxing it in another case with, like, real keyswitches. I'd lose the portability but keep the feature set.

          So where are the real calculators? Why is it that all you can get are these idiotic semi-programmable user interface nightmares? There has to be a demand for simple, powerful calculators, so why isn't anybody meeting it?

    • Perhaps he should look at the TI-36X. I got the solar powered model since I didn't want to worry about batteries. It certainly isn't as simple as the given one, but it seems to do almost everything it does (except shifting). While the A-F buttons aren't dedicated to that most of the time, they are when it's in Hex mode. It also has a 10 digit display (most calcs only have 8). I've actually bought two, since I lost the first one. Personally, it's the calculator I reach for whenever I need to do any quick calculations (or base conversion stuff). I suppose the only requirement it doesn't adequately fit is only doing what the poster's current one does (but is that really such a problem for us computer geeks?)

  • hp (Score:1)

    by Merlin42 ( 148225 )
    I LOVE my hp48gx sitting next to me right now. It takes some getting used to the "Reverse Polish Notation" but now I find 'normal' calcs very dificult to use. It is my understanding that the line got updated to the hp49 and the HP gave up on further development of its calculator line, which is a shame since they are so much better (IMNSHO) than the TI's.

    Disclaimor: My work tends toward the 'scientific computing' end of the spectrum so my calculator needs might be a bit different than the 'average' programmers. In fact I use my calc several times a day, often while I have matlab up and running too ... sometimes a calculator is just much easier to use.

    • Admit it: You've never done any significant calculations in hexadecimal on that calculator, have you?

      I say this as an owner of an HP48SX and HP48GX, and a former owner of a Casio w/ dedicated A-F buttons: The HP sucks at the tasks the poster asked about. Not only do you have to hit alpha-lock to get the A-F on the HP (every time you enter a hex number), but you also have to remember to provide the correct prefix. Further, "integers" won't mix at all with "regular numbers" without going through that annoying "B->R" and "R->B" crap.

      Do NOT get an HP48 for the tasks the original article was asking about. And I say this as a happy HP48 owner who loves RPN. You get used to the quirks, maybe, but they're frustrating. I'd rather use 'bc'.

      --Joe
      • I wish they still made the HP28S calculator. It folded open and was actually quite comfortable to "type" on. The HP48 series is an abomination for entering text/data.
      • Mr Z> I say this as an owner of an HP48SX and HP48GX, and a former owner of a Casio w/ dedicated A-F buttons: The HP sucks at the tasks the poster asked about. Not only do you have to hit alpha-lock to get the A-F on the HP (every time you enter a hex number), but you also have to remember to provide the correct prefix. Further, "integers" won't mix at all with "regular numbers" without going through that annoying "B->R" and "R->B" crap.

        Yeah, I noticed the same prob. Just write a custom CST and a few programs, and you're all set.

  • While this doesn't quite fit the bill for what you want, it's not a bad calculator. The TI-34 [ti.com] is solar powered, small, light, and doesn't try to do anything fancy. It was the "recommended" calculator at my high school, and it worked great all the way through college.

    Mine actually just died recently, and so I'm looking for a replacement. Unfortunately, TI discontinued this little gem and replaced it with a 2-line dot-matrix display thing. Ugh!! So now, like you, I'm looking for a nice simple calculator. If the TI-34 looks good to you, I'm sure you could find a used one (or maybe even a new one -- they haven't been discontinued for too long).

  • I'm guessing that a combination of market forces and technology are forcing the calculator manufacturers to make fewer products that do more.

    Rather than selling 10,000 each of ten different product lines, they can sell a million each of three different product lines. It doesn't make economic sense to make specialized products for niche markets when for the same cost you can make a single, generalized product that does everything for everybody.

    At the same time, it would be awfully nice to get a VCR with just five buttons: Play, Record, FF, RW, and Stop. Dump the clock, dump the timer, dump the prgramming. (Maybe they should just include a piece of black tape for the blinking display?) But, alas, such a thing is a figment of history.

    KISS.
    • I'd like an eject button, too :)

      • Re:Market forces reduce variety (Score:4, Interesting)

        by Webmoth ( 75878 ) on Wednesday September 04, 2002 @09:10PM (#4197939) Homepage
        "I'd like an eject button, too :)"

        OK, I'll concede. That might be useful. But if all you watch is "I Love Lucy" reruns, who needs it?

        My point was that technology has made it possible to design a gadget that does too many things, and make that gadget cheaper than its weight in salt.

        When was the last time you saw a phone that would let you dial a number? I mean just dial a number, without redial, memory, flash, hold, speakerphone, caller ID, flashing lights or any of that peripheral junk? When was the last time you actually heard a telephone RING? With an actual brass bell that went "ding-a-ling-a-ling?"

        I think that as technology progresses, people will yearn to have a few simple things: coffee makers that require you to turn them on when you want to make coffee, ovens that you have to crank a knob to turn it on (I still haven't figured out the stupid electronic panel on mine, and I'm a computer tech!), a thermostat on the wall you can turn (literally, turn) up when you're too cold and down when you're too warm.

        A story on today's Slashdot discusses the art of human interaction on the telephone (dump the "Press 7 if you have a rotary phone"...). The gist of it is that companies are discovering that people don't want to deal with a computer for simple problems. This stems from the desire of humans wanting to have control over their environment. Electronic gizmos and gadgets are slowly wresting this direct control. We become nervous, worrying, wondering whether or not the timer will actually turn on the VCR to record Friends while we're out with our friends.

        Conspiracists could theorize that technology is slowly weaning us away from having tight, tactile control over our environment, with the eventuality of some entity creeping in the back door and taking over without us even noticing. Yes, that's right, the EPA will set your thermostat, the MPAA will run your VCR, Starbucks will brew your coffee, and Martha Stewart will bake your cakes.
        • When was the last time you saw a phone that would let you dial a number? I mean just dial a number, without redial, memory, flash, hold, speakerphone, caller ID, flashing lights or any of that peripheral junk?
          It has been a while, but despite the fact all of those extra buttons are there, I simply don't use them. The phone still works the same way it has since the automatic switch was invented (Except the rotary dialer was replaced with touch tone keypads). You pick up the handset and dial. When done you put the handset back. I have never even pressed the 'Flash', 'Memory' or 'Pause' buttons on the phone.

          Even cell phones, which have way too many features, let you just dial a number, the only difference is that you have to press 'SEND' or 'TALK' after you dial.

          I am waiting for a phone manufacturer to think people mainly use speed dials and make you press another button before you can just dial a number.

          When was the last time you actually heard a telephone RING? With an actual brass bell that went "ding-a-ling-a-ling?"
          I wish that would come back. I have a phone that still has a real bell, but the rest of the phone is junk. The manufacturer thought that having a redial key (Who uses that?) was more important than the '*' key, making voicemail systems useless. That really bugs me, unlike when the extra junk is on seperate buttons.
        • When was the last time you saw a phone that would let you dial a number? I mean just dial a number, without redial, memory, flash, hold, speakerphone, caller ID, flashing lights or any of that peripheral junk? When was the last time you actually heard a telephone RING? With an actual brass bell that went "ding-a-ling-a-ling?"
          I have an ancient AT&T phone, a very early touch-tone model. It was my parents', and now it's mine and is at least 30 years old. Built like a rock. Fallen from 3-4ft heights I dunno how many times, with very little damage. Nice sound and a very loud bell ringer. It's in my garage (because it can be heard all over the yard) and oftentimes I hear it even when all of the electronic phones in the house can't be heard. 12 buttons and I can dial it without looking. The handset is the proper size, good for holding between the ear and the shoulder handsfree *without* accidentally pressing buttons.

          I wish I had two more of them...

          • "Thanks for revealing your identity. AT&T has been looking for that phone for years, and we will come by to reclaim this *leased* phone and present you with your bill for 30 years of lease fees, plus penalties and interest."

            Yeah, I remember those phones, but they showed up in the phone bill. Wasn't a monopoly great? You are the only one allowed to manufacture phones, so you can lease them out at any price to a captive market.
        • Excellent points all. I think we're starting to see a backlash against the 80s-90s impulse to put everything on a computer screen.

          A good example are the tactile knobs used in music studios using hard-disk based recording techniques.

          Our brains are wired for doing things with our hands, and using a mouse to turn a knob (or push a button) just doesn't cut it.

        • My thermostat is at 66 (and I pay the bills), I use network TV (and only one VCR), most of them understand a double short cappuccino (which is good 1 out of 5 times, just like most places), and finally, mmm... Martha Stewart... cake... or cookies... or cooked food...(and I shop at K-Mart!!!) What me worry?

          Thanks,
          chris

          PS
          I'm just waiting for good fusion reactors, true broadband media (any movie, anytime), a good barista, and a butler/maid/chef. Oh, well.

          PPS
          I broke my old casio.

        • As far as I am a computer geek, I also do like things simple. My oven only has two knobs, one for temperature, one for type of warming. The cooking plates each have one button (and I like cooking very much).

          Take remote controls. I do not have a problem with them. For my father in law however, there should be a thing with only volume control, stations up and down and one button for remote powercontrol of his TV set.

          Of course, it is also a question of philosophy. KISS is something that is not only good for design and maintenance, but also for usage. But what most people do not understand is that SIMPLE != EASY. It is much more difficult to come up with something simple and elegant, than it is to come up with something contrived. I think that simplicity is lost because of too short times-to-market. It results from the fact that designers do not have to time to look and search for several solutions to a problem, and pick the best. Instead, they use whatever solution they come up with.

          I still have my Casio FX-8000G, though. My father bought it for me, for my 21st birthday, on the airport of Abu-Dhabi. It is 15 years old, it still serves me well, although maybe it could benefit from some cleaning. It has a binary and hex mode, and I think (but I am not sure) that you just put it in this mode, and that the A-F keys are usable without special shifting.

          Jurgen

          • Take remote controls. I do not have a problem with them. For my father in law however, there should be a thing with only volume control, stations up and down and one button for remote powercontrol of his TV set.

            I actually saw a remote like this in a catalog fairly recently. It had six buttons. Power, volume up/down, channel up/down, and I don't remember what the other one was. It was dirt cheap. Unfortunately, I have no idea in the world what catalog that was in.

        • When was the last time you saw a phone that would let you dial a number? I mean just dial a number, without redial, memory, flash, hold, speakerphone, caller ID, flashing lights or any of that peripheral junk? When was the last time you actually heard a telephone RING? With an actual brass bell that went "ding-a-ling-a-ling?"

          Now, actually, I work for the government so we have cheap leftover phones that actually have a bell in them and no extra features, just dial-talk-hangup. Big chance from the multi-line big ass Lucent phone I was used to in the private sector. Despite current thinking, getting anything modern in a government job (except PC's) is next to impossible due to budget constraints.
        • >When was the last time you saw a phone that would
          >let you dial a number?

          Let's see...it was about a month ago. We were
          visiting my step-mother-in-law on Cape Cod. She
          still has her original-issue standard Bell tabletop
          phone. The handset weighs about five pounds. And
          yes you dial - with the little round dialing
          thingy - zick-clickclickclickclick,
          zick-clickclick, zickclickclickclick.

          Sadly, it was disconnected. She has a new
          wireless phone/answering machine/microwave/blender/carjack unit that can
          dial in eight different languages. I couldn't
          figure out how to play back messages...control/alt/meta/cokebottle-something.. .
        • My microwave has two dials: amount of heating, and a timer. Oh, yes, and a door release.

          A friend of mine has a microwave with twenty to thirty buttons, including a full keypad, with a dozen different cooking modes, memory facility, loads of preprogrammed settings, and an LCD display to let you know what you've done. It's so complicated it actually has a special mode where it will run through the program without producing any microwaves, just so you can check your programming. Oh, yes, and it has a door release.

          When my microwave dies, I'm going to replace it with as identical a model as I can find...

        • When was the last time you actually heard a telephone RING? With an actual brass bell that went "ding-a-ling-a-ling?"

          I have a phone that actually has a metal bell in it. It's one of those phones with a transparent body and brightly colored components. I can hear it ring from anywhere in the house. It does have a few extra features like redial and such, but those can be ignored.

      • I hit RECORD on my remote when a read-only tape is in the VCR, it ejects it.

        For some reason it doesn't swap it with the other movie I rented though...
    • Funny, you want a VCR that can't program off the air while you're away, and I want an audio recorder that can (tune to a radio station and record at a pre-set time). I guess we're both looking for a niche market item, but at least you can do what you want with any old VCR, while I have to cobble up what I want with a radio, a tape recorder, some patch cords, and a timer.

      • "...while I have to cobble up what I want with a radio, a tape recorder, some patch cords, and a timer."

        Um... I hope you're not planning on bringing this on an airplane anytime soon.
      • I actually had a Sony mini-system that was capable of this. Glancing through some reviews of current Sony mini-systems, they are mostly still capable of this. Look for "Record Timer" as a feature. A Google search for (sony mini system "record timer") brought several hits.

        I was actually shopping for answering machines, speaking of KISS. I am techologically well aware, but when it comes to things like answering machines, I want as little as possible.

        I see no need for answering machines to have ten buttons. My last one had three buttons (Play, Fast Forward/Memo, and Outgoing). Pressing Play played the messages. Pressing Outgoing played the outgoing message, and holding down the Outgoing button allowed you to record one.

        What else do you need?

        I go into the store, since my three button answering machine finally broke after six years of service, and I find machines with ten buttons. What added functionality do I want on an answering machine that requires that many buttons?

        I finally ended up buying a combination cordless phone and answering machine despite my hesitations about ever buying combination machines (if one part breaks, you have lost basically the entire unit). TV/VCR combinations are a great example of this.
        • Hah... my answering machine has two buttons... play which plays (and stops playing) messages people left, and outgoing which does the same stuff as yours. no memo feature though, but one less button to break :)
  • You may want to take a look at some of the calculators produced by Sharp. I found both the EL-506L and the EL-546L models to be quite useful. They do Hex/Bin/Oct conversions, handle parentheses, etc. They are scientific calculators, and so include quite a lot of other features that you may not want, but occassionally come in handy. At the time I bought them, they were about $30 CDN.

  • red stapler (Score:2, Funny)

    by DevilM ( 191311 )
    All I can think of is the red stapler from Office Space.
  • ...calculator for scientists and engineers? HP used to be the closest thing. But they've stopped doing calculators and all they have are almost decade year old models with a slightly faster CPU. Texas have some half decent calculators but their intended customers are students, not real scientists or engineers, so they lack some important, but heavy duty functionality, that the HPs have. The power available on PDAs today is incredible and yet nobody has seen fit to produce a decent calculator for them either.


    And before people start directing me at toy calculators here is some of what I expect of a calculator in 2002:

    • Real algebra. Not the lame half-attempt in the HP machines.
    • Full matrix arithmetic. This includes SVD, QR and LU decomposition.
    • Decent mathematics functionality including elliptic functions and Bessel functions.
    • Ability to add new datatypes including things like quaternions.
    • A rechargeable battery and a decent CPU
    • I've wondered about the same thing for the last ten years. The best idea I have is they figured very small computers were getting so good that you'd just run things like Mathematica on them, so high-end calculators would become obsolete.

      Also, way back when, HP was so far ahead of the game (in its niche), they may have felt they could sit back for a while and just enjoy the profits.
      • I think the high-end TI calculators use a version of REDUCE. But it's been stripped down to support the sort of material students get in courses - not the stuff people need in the real world. Years ago I used Mathematica on workstations with 20 MHz CPUs and a couple of MB of RAM. Any Pocket PC could blow those machines away - and yet we see no good packages for pocket devices. You'd think there'd be a need wouldn't you?
        • Any Pocket PC could blow those machines away - and yet we see no good packages for pocket devices. You'd think there'd be a need wouldn't you?

          Actually, no. Think about the resolution of a PDA screen. To get anywhere near the functionality of a decent science, engineering or finance calculator would require drilling down through several layers of menus to get to the functions. Even if the software was smart enough to move the most-often used features to the top, that's more annoying than anything - people get used to the layouts of their calcs, and don't want to actually have to hunt for a button, and do want to be able to borrow a similar one from time to time with an identical keypad.

          The computational power is the easy part. The UI is almost impossible on a current-generation PDA.

        • Any Pocket PC could blow those machines away - and yet we see no good packages for pocket devices. You'd think there'd be a need wouldn't you?

          TI-89 calculators run a trimmed down version of the Derive(tm) computer algebra package.

    • I like easycalc for the PalmOS. it's at easycalc.sourceforge.net. I think it does everything you listed, although I'm not sure about the ability to add new datatypes. Anyway, check it out.
    • http://www.casio.co.jp/edu_e/product/new_products/ hpc_edu/detail/maple.html

      Not exactly recent, but somewhere there has to be something better. But Maple (any version) would be useful to have at hand. Of course for most stuff it would be the equivalent of using nuke to remove a loose screw.
  • While TI graphing calculators don't have the hex buttons where you want them, they are very programmable. The TI-86 [acz.org] is reasonably priced and very programmable [ticalc.org]. You could write yourself a simple conversion app with remapped buttons in TI-BASIC, or go all out and integrate it into the TI-OS using an assembly language [acz.org] program. There are many sites [ticalc.org] with resources to help you and assembly language mailing lists [ticalc.org] to get help on. You can do so many cool [acz.org] things with these calculators. Remapping the keys and writing a simple conversion app would be simple.
    • Actually, remapping the keys for use in the normal calculator modes is not a very simple thing to do on the TI calcs. You'd have to register an interrupt handler, and I think the only free memory the calc won't shuffle around is the memory used for the graphics screen. So, while you had the buttons remapped, you couldn't graph.

      Note: I am sure that is correct for the TI-82 and 85. I don't know if the Asm handlers for the TI-83 or 86 have better facilities for interrupt handlers or not. I'm willing to bet they do not.

      ~GoRK
      • Actually, remapping the keys for use in the normal calculator modes is not a very simple thing to do on the TI calcs. You'd have to register an interrupt handler, and I think the only free memory the calc won't shuffle around is the memory used for the graphics screen. So, while you had the buttons remapped, you couldn't graph.

        Right, the 82 and 85 did not have assembly support built in, so interrupt handlers are more trouble. Though quite possible. One of the shells with interrupt support comes with a demo that leaves a grayscale background while in the TI-OS.

        However, I was talking about the TI-86, which does have assembly support and has a lot of built in hooks (such as the [sqrt] programs). I did a lot of programming in assembly for that calculator and if you look on ticalc.org, you will find a lot of demos that show you how to do things like that in the TI-OS. A good one to look at is Kirk Meyer's April Fools program. It completely rearranges the keyboard. A good joke to play on someone :)

        The hooks for the 86 let you do a lot of stuff. You can remap the keyboard, modify system menus, modify the parser, change output, hook into the grapher, run programs at startup, etc. Pretty much anything you want to do is possible if you're willing to do some digging in the ROM. The hardest part is keeping the TI-OS from crashing when you modify things that you shouldn't.

        If you're interested, take a look at this set of hook demos by Clem Vasseur. It's a good example of what can be done and if you actually want to write a hook, then most of the hard work is done for you:

        http://david.acz.org/hooks.zip [acz.org]

        The TI-83 line has built in assembly support, but it is not as good as the 86's, and those calculators suck anyway, so do not consider buying them. The 86 is the best calc overall, especially if you want to have fun programming. The 89 and 92 are ok, have more RAM and a faster CPU (68k instead of z80), but aren't as "clean". The 86 lets you do cool grayscale and has a lot of free RAM to play with. The 83 line can't really do grayscale, don't have much RAM and the screen is smaller (96x64 vs 128x64). The 86 is a fun device to progam.
  • Heck, I think I have one of these sitting in my father's personal effects. I remember the calculator, because I hated trying to use it for my school work when I was a kid. He passed away a year ago, and was a programmer for 30 years. I'll look around over the weekend and get back to you with an email.

  • hp-6s (Score:2)

    by tongue ( 30814 )
    the hp 6s [hp-at-home.com] seems to fit your bill... solar powered, not overpowered, does fractions, bit ops, base conversions, parens, etc... according to hp its only $10, and not as bulky as the graphic calculators we're all familiar with.

  • Considering the simplicity of the desired operations, how hard would be to build one around a super-simple microcontroller yourself? I bet a PIC could do it just fine (or even a PIC packaged up as a Basic Stamp for even easier programming). You just need a driver chip for the keypad rows/columns that will interface as input to the controller, and a very simple LCD display.

  • Easy Calc [sf.net]'s Integer mode appears to fit the bill nicely, if you already have a Palm.

    • Base conversions: got it. Four buttons in the bottom-left of the screen handle base-2, -8, -10, and -16. Selecting any of them will automatically reformat the number sitting on the result line.
    • Shift/rotate: got it, I think. At least it has << and >> buttons.
    • Absence of scientific/trig: not really, but in Integer mode, all those functions are hidden away.
    • Operator precedence: yep. Parenthesis: yep. Fonts are a reasonable size, too.
    • The Integer mode has a total of 31 buttons (16 hex digits, 4 base convertors, 2 shifters, &, |, the usual four arithmetic functions, Clear, Enter, and a button that looks like a Yen symbol), so the interface is pretty well uncluttered.

    And it's GPL'd, so if you wanted to rip out all other modes, and make it an incredibly stripped down integer-math-only calculator, you could.

  • While it's not strictly a programmer's calculator, the best thing I can think of in your field would be the TI-92. While the TI-89 is newer and in the traditional TI-form factor, the TI-92 has a full qwerty keyboard, large display, and is probably better for doing hexidecimal calculations. The TI-89 has a very sleek GUI and the button layout is excellent, but A-F require hitting the Alpha key.

    I recently bought the TI-89 for Precalc through Trigonometry in college, and I've already fallen in love with it. The text buffer is useful, and after hitting return, by default, the previous formula returns to the input field. There you can type over it or edit it, and do iterative calculations as well. All around, there are handy features like that everywhere that never seem to get in the way.

    The downside on the TI-92 is that it was discontinued. It has a slightly larger display than the TI-89, which I would have liked. The TI-89 is more powerful, but you're looking at around US$160 retail.

  • this calc [com.com] i found can do all kind sort of bit manipulation functions including bitshift, bitand, bitor etc.. and it can work in unconstrained bases from base 2 to base 69!
  • Failing all else, why not buy a PDA and write an app that mimics the interface of the calculator? (or modify it to be whatever you want).
    There are bound to be open source calculator apps for Palm OS out there you can start with and modify.
  • I know you said you dont want one geard toward engineering, however in my opinion the TI-83 does everything you need. It is in my opinion TI's best. It has great functionality with out the ugly interface of the TI-92. And acording to an add from office depot you can get it in multiple colors now. (I thought it sounded studip too.)

    • are you kidding? you can't even change base on the 83. thats a school calculator... not for programmers.
    • You've never used a TI-86, have you? It's just as clean as the TI-83 and far, far, more useful. The TI-83 can't even do calculations in anything other than base 10.
  • Calc98 [calculator.org] is a very good calculator for Windows 9x/NT and Pocket PC 2000/2002. It does dec/hex/oct/binary conversions, and does logic operations. I don't know if it does shift, but it wouldn't suprise me. And it has practically every constant known to man, including a periodic table, and does unit conversions for practically anything (Ever want to know the weight of Jupiter in Pennyweights? 1.22237x10^30) I recommend it for any engineering student, or for programming.
    • I would second that. I have Calc98 on my IPAQ and it works fine. It does do shift in programmer mode. It also has a timer/time calculator mode as well as finance and statistics modes. It also has matrix support. It isn't Open Source but it is freeware. The only thing that it isn't is programmable. Sometimes, it is useful to have a programmable programmer's calc, but usually it isn't a problem.

      The only killer with using a PDA as a calculator is the appalling battery-life, This seems to have done a dive since the days of the Psion. I also have an HP 16C running off three button cells that lasts a couple of years (even with intensive use).

  • Palm Pilot (Score:3, Informative)

    by Monkelectric ( 546685 ) <{slashdot} {at} {monkelectric.com}> on Thursday September 05, 2002 @01:41AM (#4198706)
    There are alot of great apps for the palm pilot for programming conversions

    http://palmgear.com/software/showsoftware.cfm? sid=69996520020904223550&prodID=41610

    thats my favorite, but there are plenty of others. If you dont like any of them, write one of your own. Numerical Methods is a good topic for programmers to understand. Would prolly take you a week or so to write and would be a good excercise.


  • If I had lost the calculator, I probably would have been prepared to pay $400 to replace it

    For $400 I'll sell you my graphics calculator and put some gaffer tape over the buttons you don't want to use.

    (Moderators: yes its offtopic, get a sence of humour)

  • You guys and your fancy software, and newfangled electronic contraptions. He is obviously looking for a binary abacus! [jimloy.com] http://www.jimloy.com/arith/abacus.htm

  • For $400 ... (Score:3, Informative)

    by Paul Lamere ( 21149 ) on Thursday September 05, 2002 @08:01AM (#4199299) Homepage Journal
    I'll sell you this one:

    Picture of my CM-100 [shutterfly.com]

    works great.

  • One of the other cool things Casio made in the 80's which you can't get anymore was the Casio CFX-20 Scientific Calculator Watch [pocketcalculatorshow.com]. My Dad had one and loved it to death. It had the standard chronograph, alarm, and stopwatch features. It also had a ten digit scientific calculator with metric conversions, all in a face that is one inch square.

    I would spend the hundres of dollars it would take to acquire a used one in good condition, but I doubt my Dad could read the display anymore. Vive la 80's!

  • I also have hung onto my ~1988 scientific calculator for dear life. The picture looked very familiar, but by chance I have it here at work, and it is a Radio Shack EC-4014. Unlike the poster's, it does have a few more extras: trig, fraction conversion, degree conversion, degree/rad/grad, statistics. During my years in college and grad school for chemistry, I have found all of the functions quite useful at one time or another, except maybe the random number generator (I can live with any mental bias when making up a number). The keys are pretty grimy and it has a chemical etch on the display, but I still prefer it over any other calculator. Besides the functionality, another nit I have against the newer calculators is that the solar panel is so weak! I always need to put them next to a light source just to turn it on and keep running.

    When I was a TA for chemistry, I got a kick out of all the freshmen coming in with their enormous graphing calculators, who never were able to figure out basic stoichiometry or dilution problems. Ooooh, but they could punch in a mean parabola! Really, it's the same bloat problem that's commonplace in software (Cf. Zawinski's Law [tuxedo.org]). The manufacturer can charge a higher price for the added features, and the users will still buy it because they never know when it may come in handy someday.

    We'll no doubt here from the slide rule users at some point. And those worked in the dark!

    • except maybe the random number generator (I can live with any mental bias when making up a number).

      Not me. I wouldn't be able to order a pizza without my EC-4017's RAN# key.

      0.000-0.199: Pizza Hut
      0.200-0.399: Papa John's
      0.400-0.599: Domino's
      0.600-0.799: Pagliacci
      0.800-0.999: Pizza Time

      Fifteen years or so ago, I gave my father this very EC-4017 for Christmas. He died in '98, but it was only last month that I discovered the calculator, brand new and untouched in its original box from Radio Shack, in a neglected bureau drawer at home. The OEM lithium battery hadn't even leaked.

      One of the most annoying things about Dad was his steadfast refusal to actually use anything you gave him as a present. At this point, though, having reached the same conclusion that all calculators today suck complete and total ass, I'm very grateful for that little character quirk of his. Like the original poster, I'd probably have paid a couple hundred bucks for this calculator on eBay... if one could be found there, which it can't.
  • Been using an HP-20s for about as long as you've used that one and I think it covers pretty much all your needs from base conversions to shift functions. Unlike alot of the older HP models, it doesn't default to RPN entry, but supports it for those who think that saving an occasional keystroke is worth losing your mind. On top of that, I've always preferred the look and feel of it over anything else out there. It's got some extra bells and whistles, but fewer than most and they're mostly 'behind the scenes'. The aspect you mentioned it lacks is solar power. A single set of batteries will last quite a while, but you won't make it through 2 decades without a switch :) Hope this helps http://products.hp-at-home.com/products/detail.php ?high_level_category_id=1&category_id=8&sub_catego ry_id=24&sub_category_id=24&prodnum=20S

  • By far the best programmer's calculator ever made (that I've seen, anyway) was the HP 16C [google.com]. Not made anymore, but EBay [ebay.com] usually has a few you can pick up.

  • Perl! (Score:2)

    by AT ( 21754 )
    I usually end up using perl for a calculator. Simple statements like "printf("%x", 0x43 + 0x3e)" usually get the job done.

    Why? Well, I don't always carry a calculator with me, but I always have a computer handy when I'm programming. And perl uses mostly C/C++/Java like syntax -- 0x for hex constants, printf output formatting. Not only do I not have to relearn a new syntax, but I can actually cut and paste expressions straight from code, too.

    Sure, its a little verbose, but I also run it in an emacs shell buffer, so I can cut and paste easily from one line to the next.
  • I have a TI that has the leeters too. I think it died about 7 years ago. It had LED's and ate batteries for breakfast. I just use the free ones that are on the web now.

  • Hmm, the notion of using a physical calculator seems strange for a programmer in front of a GHz-class workstation.

    I have used a calculator the last time several years ago. These days, wouldn't it be better to just fire up a program on a GUI-desktop where you cut&paste operands and results whithout going through a 10-finger interface and the chances for typing errors in either direction?

    Here is what I use as a little "sticky" window on my Linux desktop, and it really is quite simple and sufficient:

    xterm -fn 6x10 -geometry 38x7-160-120 -title "Calculator" \
    -name "bc" +ls \
    -e sh -c "mesg n; exec bc -l ${HOME}/.bcrc" &

    You can pre-define constants and even functions. Changes in base and precision ("scale") are also possible.

    When off-screen, sure, the occasional need for a calculator comes up. Well, $5 check-card size thingies and cell phones are perfectly capable of the basic operations. More serious work, e.g. programming, aught to be done on-screen.

  • You might still be able to find a Canon F-700. It's not solar powered, but it has the features you are looking for, and it's quite small.

Slashdot Top Deals

Math is like love -- a simple idea but it can get complicated. -- R. Drabek

Close