.1369 === Subject: Re: Debounce on 50G JHM & JMP, By the way, there's a very similar thread going on the HP Museum Forum about the very same subject: http://www.hpmuseum.org/cgi-sys/cgiwrap/hpmuseum/forum.cgi?read=124561#12456 1 and a contributor used almost my same words: http://www.hpmuseum.org/cgi-sys/cgiwrap/hpmuseum/forum.cgi?read=124594#12459 4 I swear we did not agree before on that :-) Maybe sort of ESP experience? ;-) Giancarlo === Subject: Re: HPcalc.org Commerce Site Update > Take a look at Eric's update of the commerce site. Has quite a nice > collection of information on all the calcs and a serial cable that I > know functions perfectly as I've tested them on a wide variety of > cheap (and not so cheap) surveying equipment. Some other cable > designs I've tried have the annoying tendency to drop the first > character, or spit out a garbage char on first transmission after an > OPENIO. http://commerce.hpcalc.org/ TW This is a GREAT new, because the cost of it in Samson Cables is MUCH more expensive. http://www.samsoncables.com/catalog/prodDetail.cfm?Prod ID=391 My only question now is: has someone test the Erick?s cable ? Does it work ? I always have good news from Erick, so hope he has done it again. Daniel === Subject: Re: HPcalc.org Commerce Site Update > Take a look at Eric's update of the commerce site. Has quite a nice > collection of information on all the calcs and a serial cable that I > know functions perfectly as I've tested them on a wide variety of > cheap (and not so cheap) surveying equipment. Some other cable > designs I've tried have the annoying tendency to drop the first > character, or spit out a garbage char on first transmission after an > OPENIO. >http://commerce.hpcalc.org/ > TW This is a GREAT new, because the cost of it in Samson Cables is MUCH > more expensive. http://www.samsoncables.com/catalog/prodDetail.cfm?Prod ID=391 My only question now is: has someone test the Erick?s cable ? Does it > work ? I always have good news from Erick, so hope he has done it > again. Daniel Hi Daniel. PLease have a look at the first post by Tim Wessmann in this very same thread - I believe you can trust him :-) Giancarlo === Subject: Another 35S first impression My new favorite calculator? They got this one almost 100% right. But not quite. My basis for comparison: My first HP was a 34C, then a 41CX, 28S, 48GX that got smashed and replaced with a 49G+ (and a 16C). I've long regretted selling the 34 to finance the 41, and have fond memories of that one that taint my impression of the 35S. I think a calculators job is to solve simple numeric problems, with the functions you need right at your fingertips, and where ever you happen to be. Anything more complicated I can always go sit down at a computer and solve. (I currently program in a machine shop so I often need to do basic trig system). I didn't particularly like the way so many of the functions are hidden on the 41 and have to be typed in, and for quick repetitive calculations the 28 and newer series are too cumbersome to program. On the other hand, I've got a whole suite of programs for doing part inspections and logging of data that automatically generates my reports on the 49 that could not possibly be done on the older style calculators, but I still think for most of what I do I would rather not deal with layers of menus. As to the aesthetics of the 35S, I think they nailed it on the retro look. Finally a return to the proper 'Enter' key. But the logo is on the wrong end of the calculator, they mislabeled the 'EEX' key, and although the second shift key points to the right, the functions are printed on the left side of the key. As for function, the display is nice. I like the way complex numbers are dealt with. There have been complaints that it is not as complete an implementation as the 42 had, but it does have all of the basics. Having vectors is a nice touch, but the single most glaring omission is not having cross product. The divide key does nothing with vectors, I would have assigned dot product to the divide key and cross product to the multiply key. The example on how to do cross product that is given in the manual is a joke. It neither accepts nor returns vectors. Also missing, but easier to work around, is the lack of polar to rectangular conversion. As long as they were using menus for the flag functions, they could have thrown in FC?, FS?C and FC?C. Yes, the manual is thick. But IMO it is also poorly written. Being a bit rusty with keystroke programming an RPN calculator, I found I got a lot more out of going back to the 34C manual and doing the exercises in it than I did from going through the 35S manual. The older manual gave complete, working examples of how to use a feature (even if the examples were trivial, they were no less useful than the 'hello world' program used when learning any new language). The new manual seems to be filled with too many ellipses and code fragments. And the example for using flags? : CF 0 FS? 0 LN STO X What's the point of that? How much harder would it have been to think of something that actually does something. As I was typing the program attached below into my 35S I noticed more than once it missed a keystroke. I don't recall that ever being a problem with the 34C or the early 41s (as an aside, I'm typing this e- mail on an HP laptop and have missed at least 30 characters just in this message alone, maybe my touch is too light, or maybe it's just Chinese manufacturing at it's best). And for those who may need a cross product, here's my version: C001 LBL C C002 x<>y C003 [1,0,0] C004 XEQ C046 C005 STO X C006 RDN C007 [0,1,0] C008 XEQ C046 C009 STO Y C010 RDN C011 [0,0,1] C012 XEQ C046 C013 STO Z C014 RDN C015 x<>y C016 [1,0,0] C017 XEQ C046 C018 STO U C019 RDN C020 [0,1,0] C021 XEQ C046 C022 STO V C023 RDN C024 [0,0,1] C025 XEQ C046 C026 STO W C027 RCL* Y C028 RCL Z C029 RCL* V C030 - C031 STO A C032 RCL Z C033 RCL* U C034 RCL X C035 RCL* W C036 - C037 STO B C038 RCL X C039 RCL* V C040 RCL Y C041 RCL* U C042 - C043 STO C C044 [A,B,C] C045 RTN C046 x<>y C047 * C048 LASTx C049 x<>y C050 RTN === Subject: Re: Another 35S first impression > I didn't particularly like the way so many of the functions > are hidden on the 41 and have to be typed in, You're aware you could assign them to keys right? > CF 0 > FS? 0 > LN > STO X What's the point of that? How much harder would it have been to think > of something that actually does something. I believe it clears Flag 0 and stores something in X. Of course I would suggest something simpler, like: > CF 0 > STO X My feeling is that someone read the FC?C 0 SF0 (which actually TOGGLES Flag 0) but didn't remember it quite right ... > As I was typing the program attached below into my 35S I noticed more > than once it missed a keystroke. I don't recall that ever being a > problem with the 34C or the early 41s (as an aside, I'm typing this e- > mail on an HP laptop and have missed at least 30 characters just in > this message alone, maybe my touch is too light, or maybe it's just > Chinese manufacturing at it's best). Or maybe it's that thing I refer to as HP crap since I met the Pavilion 510n ... === Subject: Re: Another 35S first impression > My new favorite calculator? They got this one almost 100% right. But > not quite. My basis for comparison: My first HP was a 34C, then a 41CX, 28S, 48GX > that got smashed and replaced with a 49G+ (and a 16C). I've long > regretted selling the 34 to finance the 41, and have fond memories of > that one that taint my impression of the 35S. I think a calculators > job is to solve simple numeric problems, with the functions you need > right at your fingertips, and where ever you happen to be. Anything > more complicated I can always go sit down at a computer and solve. (I > currently program in a machine shop so I often need to do basic trig > system). I didn't particularly like the way so many of the functions > are hidden on the 41 and have to be typed in, and for quick repetitive > calculations the 28 and newer series are too cumbersome to program. On > the other hand, I've got a whole suite of programs for doing part > inspections and logging of data that automatically generates my > reports on the 49 that could not possibly be done on the older style > calculators, but I still think for most of what I do I would rather > not deal with layers of menus. As to the aesthetics of the 35S, I think they nailed it on the retro > look. Finally a return to the proper 'Enter' key. But the logo is on > the wrong end of the calculator, they mislabeled the 'EEX' key, and > although the second shift key points to the right, the functions are > printed on the left side of the key. As for function, the display is nice. I like the way complex numbers > are dealt with. There have been complaints that it is not as complete > an implementation as the 42 had, but it does have all of the basics. > Having vectors is a nice touch, but the single most glaring omission > is not having cross product. The divide key does nothing with vectors, > I would have assigned dot product to the divide key and cross product > to the multiply key. The example on how to do cross product that is > given in the manual is a joke. It neither accepts nor returns vectors. > Also missing, but easier to work around, is the lack of polar to > rectangular conversion. As long as they were using menus for the flag functions, they could > have thrown in FC?, FS?C and FC?C. Yes, the manual is thick. But IMO it is also poorly written. Being a > bit rusty with keystroke programming an RPN calculator, I found I got > a lot more out of going back to the 34C manual and doing the exercises > in it than I did from going through the 35S manual. The older manual > gave complete, working examples of how to use a feature (even if the > examples were trivial, they were no less useful than the 'hello world' > program used when learning any new language). The new manual seems to > be filled with too many ellipses and code fragments. And the example > for using flags? : CF 0 > FS? 0 > LN > STO X What's the point of that? How much harder would it have been to think > of something that actually does something. > I agree that the 35s is the first HP calculator in some time to have a reasonably classic look and feel. It also has a minimum of menus considering the number of functions available. People want the functions but do not want menus or too large a calculator size and weight. In this case a difficult thing to get around. The HP67 had 3 shift keys so most keys had 4 functions. With various modes and shifts the RPL units have at least 5 functions per key and still need menus and XEQ functions. I love the 42s for RPN programming but the number of functions requiring either going through a menu or the use of XEQ and a function name spelled out is a pain for field use. IMO it should have had a second shift key to help a little bit. The 34c was a definite advance when introduced, with the Solve function. I never cared for the keyboard in that series though as it seemed too stiff to me compared to the classics or the 41c. Rich W === Subject: Re: Another 35S first impression [comparison with HP34C] > The 34c was a definite advance when introduced, with the Solve > function. I never cared for the keyboard in that series though > as it seemed too stiff to me compared to the classics or the 41c. The stiff keyboards of the Spice series were probably those which were faulty for another reason, because of a design which so much bent the electrical conductor in the plastic dome of each key as it was pressed, that pretty soon, just like any metal wire continually bent back and forth, it would break, and cease to make contact. Besides this, none of the main components was soldered -- ICs were merely _pressed_ (by foam) against the circuit board (a thin film), and so were leads from the LED array. To top it all off, the old habit of gold-plated conductors and connectors had also disappeared, so that after some while, my own 34C needed a few Yoga body twist exercises (as well as many home-brew keyboard repairs) to start working again at all. When HP began to turn out Spice replacements with all new keyboards, those had metal discs, similar to the Voyager series (11C/12C/15C/16C) and perhaps to the HP50G, which are not stiff at all; they also returned to old-fashioned, reliable soldering to hold the works together. 30 Series Technology And Packaging, A Whole New Way Of Building Calculators [which fortunately didn't last long] http://www.hpmuseum.org/tech30.htm [r->] [OFF] === Subject: Re: Another 35S first impression [comparison with HP34C] The 34c was a definite advance when introduced, with the Solve > function. I never cared for the keyboard in that series though > as it seemed too stiff to me compared to the classics or the 41c. The stiff keyboards of the Spice series were probably those which > were faulty for another reason, because of a design which so much > bent the electrical conductor in the plastic dome of each key as it > was pressed, that pretty soon, just like any metal wire continually > bent back and forth, it would break, and cease to make contact. Besides this, none of the main components was soldered -- ICs were > merely _pressed_ (by foam) against the circuit board (a thin film), > and so were leads from the LED array. To top it all off, > the old habit of gold-plated conductors and connectors > had also disappeared, so that after some while, > my own 34C needed a few Yoga body twist exercises > (as well as many home-brew keyboard repairs) > to start working again at all. When HP began to turn out Spice replacements with all new keyboards, > those had metal discs, similar to the Voyager series (11C/12C/15C/16C) > and perhaps to the HP50G, which are not stiff at all; > they also returned to old-fashioned, reliable soldering > to hold the works together. 30 Series Technology And Packaging, > A Whole New Way Of Building Calculators > [which fortunately didn't last long]http://www.hpmuseum.org/tech30.htm [r->] [OFF] Maybe that is why they seem to be some of the least common units to show up on ebay. Most died an early death due to designed production economies which turned out to not be reliable. Rich W === Subject: Implementing a fixed size stack for an RPN Calculator I have implemented an RPN calculator in python but now I would like to make the stack size fixed. how can I transform the user's RPN expression from a stack overflow to a computable expression. For instance, if my stack size is 2 then the some expression can't be computed but could be transformed as following: Non computable expression: 1 2 3 + + --> stack size of 3 is needed Computable expression: 1 2 + 3 + --> stack size of 2 is needed How can I define a formal way of transforming the non computable expression to computable one. My RPN only implements: + - x % === Subject: Re: Implementing a fixed size stack for an RPN Calculator OpenPGP: id=14137F7D; url=http://hpgcc.org/pgp_key_14137F7D.txt -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 > I have implemented an RPN calculator in python but now I would like to > make the stack size fixed. how can I transform the user's RPN > expression from a stack overflow to a computable expression. For instance, if my stack size is 2 then the some expression can't be > computed but could be transformed as following: Non computable expression: 1 2 3 + + --> stack size of 3 is > needed > Computable expression: 1 2 + 3 + --> stack size of 2 > is needed How can I define a formal way of transforming the non computable > expression to computable one. My RPN only implements: + - x % > A proper implemented expression parser (top down recursive), which also accounts for left/right operator associations should do that automatically. It generates a balanced tree, i.e. optimized stack depth or register usage for non stack based implementations. Check the relevant compiler building literature. Lex and Yacc (available for Python) also work fine for that job ... - -- Ingo Blank http://hpgcc.org http://blog.hpgcc.org -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (MingW32) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFG6S5xr9bi0BQTf30RAgHYAKD+osIwOMSCfmceeCI2SG7Mpm+CigCfbpf+ uNSRRJkF3kvKE+lQE8N58v8= =inmq -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- === Subject: Re: Non-programmable RPN Calculator > The hp 15 scientific calculator did complex arithmetic and had very > little programming capabilities. Huh? It had perfectly fine programming capabilities. === Subject: Re: Non-programmable RPN Calculator Eric Smith schrieb im Newsbeitrag >> The hp 15 scientific calculator did complex arithmetic and had very >> little programming capabilities. Huh? It had perfectly fine programming capabilities. > Seems to be a matter of perspective;-) If seen from an HP-41 or HP-48 user, the 11C and 15C programming model may look...limited? Raymond === Subject: Re: Non-programmable RPN Calculator See if the instructor would allow a memory reset in his presence on the 35S that you have ordered. Back in the days of the 34C we had a chemistry professor that would allow that calculator if we proved a memory flush. Although to this day I still can't fathom what programs I could write for a basic chemistry class. === Subject: Re: Non-programmable RPN Calculator Pellidon schrieb im Newsbeitrag > See if the instructor would allow a memory reset in his presence on > the 35S that you have ordered. Back in the days of the 34C we had a > chemistry professor that would allow that calculator if we proved a > memory flush. Although to this day I still can't fathom what programs > I could write for a basic chemistry class. > Back then in the early eighties, my math teacher at the EE school allowed me to use my HP-41 during lessons and in tests. He had an HP-41CV. Tasks were arranged in a way that you had to *know* the way to solve them. However I remember in one lesson we had to build a mathematical function set for specific points in a three-phase AC circuit. I programmed the function set in my HP-41, so I could easily get the results for my entries. This way, I had solved the task in less than half the time the other students needed with their Casios, and the teacher was impressed:-) As said above he also had an HP-41, but abviously didn't care much about its programmability features. === Subject: Re: Non-programmable RPN Calculator >Pellidon schrieb im Newsbeitrag >> See if the instructor would allow a memory reset in his presence on >> the 35S that you have ordered. Back in the days of the 34C we had a >> chemistry professor that would allow that calculator if we proved a >> memory flush. Although to this day I still can't fathom what programs >> I could write for a basic chemistry class. >Back then in the early eighties, my math teacher at the EE school >allowed me to use my HP-41 during lessons and in tests. He had an HP-41CV. >Tasks were arranged in a way that you had to *know* the way to solve them. However I remember in one lesson we had to build a mathematical function >set for specific points in a three-phase AC circuit. >I programmed the function set in my HP-41, >so I could easily get the results for my entries. This way, I had solved the task in less than half the time the other >students needed with their Casios, and the teacher was impressed:-) As said above he also had an HP-41, but abviously didn't care much >about its programmability features. > I had a experience in my Junior year in 1981 while getting my BS in Physics. I was taking an exam in Thermodynamics, and there was a question on the exam where we were supposed to use math ( Calculus, etc,) to solve a problem and my mind went blank. problem numerically. I got 23 out of 25 pt's for the question. Harold A. Climer Dept. Of Physics, Geology, and Astronomy University of Tennessee at Chattanooga 309 Grote Hall 423-425-4546 Harold-Climer@utc.edu === Subject: Re: Non-programmable RPN Calculator > Personally I feel college level tests should be open book anyway as > IMO the purpose of college is not to force memorization but teach how > to find and use the information required. I couldn't agree more. A closed book exam is a sign of a weak professor (e.g. questions are taken from a commonly available book or worse, the textbook). My Control Systems course in 4th years was bring whatever you can carry exam. Wouldn't have made the tiniest bit of difference anyway. If you didn't understand the basic concepts of the course, you weren't about to learn the missing stuff from a book in the 3 hours allotted. === Subject: Re: Non-programmable RPN Calculator >> Personally I feel college level tests should be open book anyway as >> IMO the purpose of college is not to force memorization but teach how >> to find and use the information required. I couldn't agree more. A closed book exam is a sign of a weak professor > (e.g. questions are taken from a commonly available book or worse, the > textbook). My Control Systems course in 4th years was bring whatever you > can carry exam. Wouldn't have made the tiniest bit of difference anyway. > If you didn't understand the basic concepts of the course, you weren't about > to learn the missing stuff from a book in the 3 hours allotted. If the exam is given with a time deadline for completion, then most exam aids can be made irrelevant by simply having enough questions to answer that there isn't enough time both to look up solutions and to complete the exam. === Subject: Re: HP35s on Amazon > I am not sure that this was mentioned... HP 35s is available from > Amazon > although there are reviews with 1 star > and 2 stars. Yeah, marvelous reviews. 1 star for it not being a 41 and not caring > to read the user manual. 2 stars for not using AAA batteries and not > having any clue how RPN differs from RPL. 3 stars for not having > actually used it but is really really sure that the RPN is broken > because it's not like his RPL based 28.... Amazon needs your reviews.... Of course this isn't totally unexpected with Amazon reviews. If you > want a 5 star calculator, I guess you want the CalcuBot:http://tinyurl.com/27vhg5 *sigh* > -Jonathan Regardless of the reviews (I gave it 4 stars originally) apparently selling ok as the number of vendors with it in stock has dropped to two, one at list price and the other close to list. I updated my review too in order to point out that some of the reviewers were mistaken in their knowledge of RPN versus RPL HP calculators and their correct function. Rich W === Subject: HP 42S Fast Mode Question Anyone aware of a method other than using the debugger to switch a later model HP 42s calculator into fast mode? I found a program to do the job on units with the store indirect with register size 0 bug but it errors out on later calculators. Using the debugger is slow and the calculator reverts to normal speed as soon as the on/off/clr key is pressed. The last is inevitable I suspect but a programmed way to switch speeds would be great if available for later units. Rich W === Subject: Re: HP 42S Fast Mode Question > Anyone aware of a method other than using the debugger to switch a > later model HP 42s calculator into fast mode? I found a program to > do the job on units with the store indirect with register size 0 bug > but it errors out on later calculators. Using the debugger is slow and the calculator reverts to normal speed > as soon as the on/off/clr key is pressed. The last is inevitable I > suspect but a programmed way to switch speeds would be great if > available for later units. Rich W There is no other way to do this on later HP 42s models. Gene === Subject: Re: HP 42S Fast Mode Question > Anyone aware of a method other than using the debugger to switch a > later model HP 42s calculator into fast mode? I found a program to > do the job on units with the store indirect with register size 0 bug > but it errors out on later calculators. > Using the debugger is slow and the calculator reverts to normal speed > as soon as the on/off/clr key is pressed. The last is inevitable I > suspect but a programmed way to switch speeds would be great if > available for later units. > Rich W There is no other way to do this on later HP 42s models. Gene Gene; can be switched under program control. The one with the necessary bug is dated 2911Sxxxxx. Unfortunately it's display contrast is poorer than my other two. Rich W === Subject: Re: Connecting the 50G to the internet James Horn, le Sat 08 Sep 2007 00:09:08 -0000, a .8ecrit : > Considering that the HP-49 and 50 have far more memory and processor > horsepower than almost *any* computers did when the Web started (1989), > I didn't doubt you could do it. Bravo!! Well, it actually even works on 48s :) Samuel === Subject: Re: Connecting the 50G to the internet Brandon Del Bel, le Fri 07 Sep 2007 23:23:12 -0000, a .8ecrit : > Looks like I posted too soon. I set up IP masquerading, and everything > works now. Oh, good, I don't own a 50G, so couldn't test Usinagaz on it. I'm glad it does work. About ircprime, see with Yoann D.8esir, I think he has more http://youpibouh.thefreecat.org/info/prog/down/irc-0827.lib As you can see, I'm not very reactive on comp.sys.hp48, so if you have questions, you should probably Cc me :) Samuel === Subject: Re: Connecting the 50G to the internet > Brandon Del Bel <> schrieb im >> The second thing I noticed is that navigator >> 0.08+ has a few lines of garbage on the bottom of the display. Here is >> an example:http://mancubus.net/~exp/files/garbage.jpg >> Remember that most software was written before the 49g+/50g came out, >> and so most software doesn't make use of the extra pixel lines. >> Raymond > I understand that most of the software wasn't intended for the larger > display, but the description for version 0.08+ on hpcalc.org says > This version is for the 49G+ and 50G only, because it uses the entire > 131x80 display. Hmm, then there's something which doesn't match, > be it either the description or the program itself;-) Humm... right, the version available on hpcalc was not the right one... I submitted an update to Eric Rechlin a few minutes ago, and I hope he will be able to perform an update soon. www.hp-sources.com has been down for a couple of years now, and I feel it will not re-appear very soon, sorry. AND of course, the hp50g can surf the internet, but you need linux and IP forwarding, or either a RTC modem conected to the RS232C serial port. The version online had a display bug, but I think it was suitable anyway. As for IRC Prime, no further version was submitted... (unfortunately). Yoann D?sir === Subject: HP48GX and HP48SX for sale to whom it may concern http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&rd=1&item=320156033787 http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&rd=1&item=320157992057 thank you === Subject: Re: Batteries Reports I'm currently using Duracell Power Pix cells which is a Nickel Oxy > Hydroxide Battery. Oxyrides are the same makeup. I was playing Yathzee > for about an hour at the airport and the battery monitor finally > dropped to 5.85 volts. Prior to that with casual use and some > programming, about an hour's worth, it stayed over 6 volts. I put the batteries in before I installed the battery monitor program > but the old 49G+ program kept showing 100% I won't know the initial > starting levels until these go dead and I replace them. I think the oxy types are worth the cost. I recently bought some Hybrio AA rechargeable batteries. These batteries are supposed to have extremely low self discharge rate, reportedly keeping 90% of their charge after 6 months. I checked these batteries voltage and it is about 1.37V which is .1 V higher than standard NiHi. and well above the HP50g's low battery indicator threshold. AAA's of this type exist but not available in my home country so I cannot check them myself, but maybe someone out there in comp.sys.hp48 land might be interested. Here is a link http://www.greenbatteries.com/hybrionimhaaa.html Luis === Subject: Re: Batteries Reports > I'm currently using Duracell Power Pix cells which is a Nickel Oxy > Hydroxide Battery. Oxyrides are the same makeup. I was playing Yathzee > for about an hour at the airport and the battery monitor finally > dropped to 5.85 volts. Prior to that with casual use and some > programming, about an hour's worth, it stayed over 6 volts. > I put the batteries in before I installed the battery monitor program > but the old 49G+ program kept showing 100% I won't know the initial > starting levels until these go dead and I replace them. > I think the oxy types are worth the cost. I recently bought some Hybrio AA rechargeable batteries. These > batteries are supposed to have extremely low self discharge rate, > reportedly keeping 90% of their charge after 6 months. I checked > these batteries voltage and it is about 1.37V which is .1 V higher > than standard NiHi. and well above the HP50g's low battery indicator > threshold. AAA's of this type exist but not available in my home > country so I cannot check them myself, but maybe someone out there in > comp.sys.hp48 land might be interested. Here is a linkhttp://www.greenbatteries.com/hybrionimhaaa.html Luis These are also available under the eneloop name from Sanyo. I got some AA size from Circuit City, a stockist. Lower capacity than some other NIMH batteries but the low self discharge rate means longer times between charging for devices used only occasionally or with lower current drains. Rich W === Subject: Mini Challenge: Non recursive ->RPN in UserRPL Hi people... I wish to start something like a minichallenge... i've been looking 48g and it's very interesting... I was thinking about to do a non recursive version of ->RPN in UserRPL, but my little knowledgments in programming have not been enougth... then i think that you will do it! but to add some recreation it will be a Mini Challenge... The most effectives programs in size and velocity will win... it have to be written only in UserRPL withouth LIBEVALs or SYSEVALs, and have to run fine in 48 and 50 series... Maybe it's more easy that i think... Do you accept? IF THEN Happy Programming MSGBOX ELSE :Â( END === Subject: New release of Orpie rpn calculator program Version 1.5.0 of the Orpie full-screen rpn calculator is now available at http://www.eecs.umich.edu/~pelzlpj/orpie/ Orpie is a fullscreen RPN calculator for the console. Its operation is similar to that of modern HP calculators, but data entry has been optimized for efficiency on a PC keyboard. Features include extensive scientific calculator functionality, command completion, and a visible interactive stack. --