Right now, XEQ A runs LBL A just like pressing A directly. However we can make XEQ A run LBL 11 instead by removing the NO_SHORT from
regA_idx, regB_idx,
regC_idx, regD_idx,
We would need a small change to process_key() to still allow us to enter LBL A in program mode.
if (shorthand && State2.runmode)
This gives us another 4 "quick call" labels and if we want to keep those keys as Sigma+, 1/x, y^x and sqrt(x) we can use 11-14 instead of A-D as labels.
I think XEQ A runs LBL 'A', which is different from LBL A, IIRC.
Edited: 16 Oct 2011, 1:48 a.m.
Please see "Addressing Labels" - page 24 of the manual :-)
Edited: 16 Oct 2011, 3:58 p.m. after one or more responses were posted
I don't like this much.
How do I enter XEQ A in a program before I've defined LBL A?
Doing this also loses consistency between run and program modes.
The same keystrokes should do the same thing in both.
- Pauli
Is this new?
In 1664 XEQ A run LBL A just like pressing A directly. XEQ ENTER A ENTER runs LBL 'A (four keys strokes)
Quote:How do I enter XEQ A in a program before I've defined LBL A?
That does not change.
Quote:
Doing this also loses consistency between run and program modes.
The same keystrokes should do the same thing in both.
Agreed, for the first four labels - if they are used.
Edited: 16 Oct 2011, 6:19 a.m.
I like the idea of four additional hotkeys in addition to A...D. Maybe because I am used to the 41C which has no less than 15 of these. So I think something like [prefix] [A] would be nice. For instance, as mentioned, [A] and [XEQ] [A].
Dieter
Walter, read the docs (or change them if they are wrong on this)! There is absolutely no connection between labels 'A' and A and there is no shortcut to address label 'A'. To access subroutine 'A' you need to press XEQ ENTER^ A ENTER^.
XEQ A and A do the same if A is defined as a label and is not used as a digit (where f+A takes this duty).
Back to Dominc's suggestion: It will cause more grief then fun because it's unexpected behavior. If you want a shortcut to label 11 just use XEQ f A.
A to D have functions on the shift planes which would be unaccessible if we'd allow for a prefixed A to D shortcut.
XEQ f A calls XEQ 11.
:-? Marcus, you go out on a limb there. I'd recommend you read said page yourself thoroughly instead of claiming anything pointless. What you wrote is exactly what the manual says.
Edited: 16 Oct 2011, 3:59 p.m.
Quote:Actually I had some other kind of prefix keys in mind. But honestly, I simply forgot the following feature:
A to D have functions on the shift planes which would be unaccessible if we'd allow for a prefixed A to D shortcut.
Quote:This will do.
XEQ f A calls XEQ 11.
Dieter
But that's inconsistent with the other shortcut keys, like STO, where XEQ STO call LBL 21. I was trading runtime inconsistency for programming inconsistency, favouring the one that means fewer keystrokes at runtime. It also frees up XEQ f to call LBL 24.
Sorry, I misread your comment in that you were seconding Alexander's remark. I remember that there was such a confusion in an earlier version of the manual.
Your answers are often just a bit terse: "RTFM on page xyz!" instead of citing or rephrasing a few words. So the reader never knows what the essence of your post is, except he goes to the file system, fires up Acrobat Reader with the manual, goes to page xyz, finds the corresponding text, and then returns to the forum in order to re-read and answer your post. That was just too demanding for me on a Sunday afternoon.
The f prefix allows to address any key (not only A to D) to act as a shortcut. The shifts are exempt from this feature because they never act upon themselves, only as a prefix. The rule is:
If a key has no predefined meaning in the context of label entry, it is translated to a row/column code. If it has, it can still be used this way by prefixing it with f. The prefix just disables the special meaning of the key such as the digits or '.'.
With the new feature of command display you can always control what will be executed. This has the potential to increase the confidence in what WP 34S will execute upon a given keystroke sequence.
In fact, I seldom write RTFM unless well deserved ;-) I think, however, that manual is written and maintained to be read. And sometimes I hate repeating what I wrote (hmmmh, maybe more than sometimes).
Quote:
Sorry, I misread your comment in that you were seconding Alexander's remark.
Well, I did also. Even after reading said manual page a couple of times now I still am confused. ;)
Edited: 17 Oct 2011, 4:24 a.m.
Quote:Don't hesitate to ask questions. Please quote what's confusing you :-)
Even after reading said manual page a couple of times now I still am confused.
Quote:
what's confusing you :-)
In a word? The manual! ;)
Please don't get me wrong, I'm not complaining. I'm just a guy who needs at least a five lines code snippet to accompany every single function in the manual, every necessary keystroke written down. Without that I find myself all searching at the wrong places or the wrong keywords.
Alex,
Sounds like you should be contributing to the wiki Users Guide :-)
With Walter's pointer, I did peruse page 24 and yes, it does say it right there (in 3rd column and footnote 14).
All the information is in the manual, but sometimes it feels like that little bit you are looking for is "in the bottom of a locked filing cabinet stuck in a disused lavatory with a sign on the door saying 'Beware of the Leopard'".
As soon as I understand a topic, I might eventually try to put that in words, although I am not so sure I can do it any better.
Re-reading the manual and Walter's statement on it above, I guess I know now what got me confused: Walter's posting first said 'Correct' before he edited that out. I'm actually happy to see him confused with the manual, too. ;-)