revisted: the 4 banger+ - Printable Version +- HP Forums (https://archived.hpcalc.org/museumforum) +-- Forum: HP Museum Forums (https://archived.hpcalc.org/museumforum/forum-1.html) +--- Forum: Old HP Forum Archives (https://archived.hpcalc.org/museumforum/forum-2.html) +--- Thread: revisted: the 4 banger+ (/thread-116869.html) |
revisted: the 4 banger+ - Paul Dale - 06-18-2007 I've been fiddling around with the super 4 banger that got mentioned a few weeks back. The items in question are down near the end of the Sneek Preview: Anniversary Edition thread.
Using my ugly ASCII art approach, the main keyboard I've come up with is: ENTER^ X<>Y CHS Clx
and the shifted keyspace: LASTx Rv EEX CLREG/CLPRG What I've ditched are the trigometrics and HMS functionality. In their place I've added factorial (gamma?) and integer part functions and some degree of programmability. Basically, I tried to maintain as much of the 12c's non-financial instructions as I could.
Anyway, some details:
I've coded pretty much all of this in C (command line/terminal window). I'm still finding bugs but if you want the code... One thing I'm yet to code include shortcuts to GSB to the low program addresses via pressing GSB followed by one of the top row of keys possibly shifted. This will be implemented via a jump table and it will give easy access to eight user defined functions. Which happens to be enough to support trigonometric operations if desired. Thoughts?
- Pauli
Re: revisited: the 4 banger+ - Walter B - 06-19-2007 Paul,
nice exercise! And your ASCII art approach (AAA) is perfectly sufficient to see your intentions. However, as you may have expected, there are some questions. Please take everything as MHO:
Just my 0,02 Euros :-)
Re: revisited: the 4 banger+ - DaveJ - 06-19-2007 Quote:
Precisely what I think also. I'd be happy with just the one memory register on a basic scientific.
Dave.
Re: revisited: the 4 banger+ - Klaus - 06-19-2007 Yes, a simple keyboard is desireable. My solution: What does a keypress mean? In classic HPs, the keycode has been used as an address in the ROM to execute the function. My approach would be to create overlays (paper or plastic) for your keys. These overlays would include some metal contacts (that work like hardwired jumpers) that select the function of some keys. Now you can keep your keyboard small, while the user can heavily customize her/his calc. You want the basic arithmetic (+-*/) on the left side? No problem! You need logs & trigs? Just use the right overlay!
[Edited to correct some typos] Edited: 19 June 2007, 6:28 a.m.
Re: revisited: the 4 banger+ - Maximilian Hohmann - 06-19-2007 Hello!
Quote:
Agreed... Either you build a single-seater sailplane (to use an example from my world), or a 500-passenger supersonic vertical-takeoff transport aeroplane with worldwide range. You can't have both within the same package, I'm afraid. Re: revisited: the 4 banger+ - DaveJ - 06-19-2007 Awesome, truly awesome!
Dave.
Re: revisited: the 4 banger+ - Walter B - 06-19-2007 Really great design! And so customer-oriented! Next to perfection!! :-D
Re: revisted: the 4 banger+ - Egan Ford - 06-19-2007 Where is the 'on' button? Solar? Always on? How about hold-shift for on/off? I have to agree with the others, there is no need for INTG or programmability. I think the BANGO-EXPANDER is a bit extreme, but the right idea. My thoughts were that the device have some form of I/O. Many embedded processors have a serial device. It would be easy to add, say, Bluetooth. The "Expander" would be a very nice emulator/debugger for your desktop. All programming and testing would be there, then BT downloaded to the BANGO. This would also enable others to share data/code with other BANGOs. If your mobile phone was BT-enabled, then your BANGO could get code/data online (iRPN, iCode, iCalc?) Since few want to carry around, yet-another-device, I would suggest that you create Windows Mobile (PDA and Smartphone), Blackberry, Symbian, and Palm versions first. For a few extra bucks, add a jack, miniSD slot, dot matrix display and play tunes on it.
I'd also like it to float and be water resistance to 1M (like my GPS).
Re: revisted: the 4 banger+ - Maximilian Hohmann - 06-19-2007 Hi!
Quote:
Ooops, I forgot about that one... Here it is (press 'CLX' for more than a second and it wakes up without clearing anything, auto-power off after 5 minutes with no loss of stack contents of course), together with the red status LED that will start flashing when the battery gets low. And the waterproof cast titanium housing :-). The whole thing could also have a simple USB connector so that one could use his existing PC/Macintosh keyboard to access the 'invisible' functions. Re: revisited: the 4 banger+ - Paul Dale - 06-19-2007 Good points. There is reason behind my madness...
Quote: Fiddling with this from my computer keybaord leads me to believe that the tricky keystroke combinations aren't so bad. My current program gives you feedback on every keystroke, doesn't care about the ordering and most of the modifiers are reversable i.e. it is fairly flexible about entry. An extra line of keys would be better but that wasn't the point :-)
Quote: Isn't this the same method use by the "almost perfect" 15c for both the test and matrix functions? This is one feature of the 15c user interface that I don't much like but there isn't any other obvious way to get the functionality there or here.
Quote: Oops, sorry. Don't know how that got mixed up again :-(
Quote: I actually agree my direction here is somewhat skew, I didn't design this with the intention of seeing it in production (although I will admit that that would be kind of neat). I designed it as a first step towards the realisation of something closer to a traditional scientific programmable. To this aim, I needed it to be programmable so my emulator could handle that aspect. I needed a few representative functions so I could build the framework for them. I needed some kind of input state machine to handle prefixes etc. I also wanted to keep it relatively simple and still retain some meaure of "complete" functionality.
Re: revisited: the 4 banger+ - Walter B - 06-19-2007 OK, after reading your post I don't understand what's your design goal (I am only knowing what's *not*), but I don't have to ;-) Just one point: Maybe just such sequences like TEST 2 are the reason for the 15C being only "almost" perfect. IMHO the 15C is a very nice little calc with a perfect function set for its time 25 years ago. No less, no more. You will find stronger believers in the eternal power of the 15C in this forum. Once upon a time, we had a project with the objective to create a modern calc with about the same outer dimensions. I do not remember anything like TEST 2 in its function set, but my bad memory, you know ;-)
Best regards, Walter
Re: revisted: the 4 banger+ - Paul Guertin - 06-23-2007 Quote: Here is my interpretation of a "super 4 banger", meaning (for me) a basic, non-programmable scientific calculator. I tried to keep it as simple as possible while including most common functions (common for me). I limited myself to a 20-key pad, since physical size was an important constraint. Some notes: 1. There is no on/off key. To turn it on, push any key. To turn it off, hold SHIFT down for a couple seconds (or wait 10 minutes). 2. Note the INV function (on the 4 key), applicable to SIN, COS, TAN, LN, LOG, R->P, ->DMS, D->R and SQRT to compute the inverse function. It can also be applied to y^x to compute y^(1/x) (saving one keystroke). There is of course no need to use the shift key again after INV. E.g., push SHIFT then 4 then 1 to compute the arcsine. 3. There is only one memory. STO and RCL do not take an argument. 4. Fractional numbers can be input in 32S-like syntax (e.g., 3.1.2 for 3 and a half, or 9..7 for nine sevenths), but they are immediately converted to floating point. There is no FDISP equivalent. 5. I like the idea of having a 2-line display, but I'd rather have a sharper, numbers-only display instead of the 42S bitmapped display pictured here. 6. The DISP key is used to set the display mode (normal/scientific, number of digits displayed) and also the angular mode (degrees/radians). 7. Designing keyboards for imaginary calculators is a great way to waste time!
Re: revisted: the 4 banger+ - Walter B - 06-23-2007 Nice model! Three remarks only: Quote:Why not more? I'd like to have 10 registers. And with your keyboard, e.g. SHIFT STO + 0 is easily accomplished. Quote:Hope they use .9.7 to enter nine seventh. Else I need an extra push in logics. Quote:Great indeed! :-)) Re: revisted: the 4 banger+ - Paul Guertin - 06-23-2007 Quote: I hesitated between the ease of use of one register and the power of ten. In the end, simplicity won, mostly because I rarely use more than one register. This can of course be changed without any modification to the keyboard if you prefer more registers and register arithmetic.
Quote:
The input formats are a.b.c to enter a + b/c, or a..b to enter a/b. So both .9.7 and 9..7 can be used to enter 9/7.
Re: revisted: the 4 banger+ - DaveJ - 06-23-2007 Excellent! I would have had the exponent key unshifted in place of the X-Y key. I would also swap the SHIFT and X-Y keys. R-P but no P-R?, or is that a typo with D-R? I would remove the INV shift function on the 4 key and rely on a double press of SHIFT to enable the inverse functions. An ENG and <ENG function would be really nice!, drop the factorial or D.MS keys if needed. Yes, a super 4-banger would of course use a more readable segmented LCD instead of dot matrix. I would so want one of these!
Dave.
Re: revisted: the 4 banger+ - Paul Guertin - 06-24-2007 Thank you for your insightful comments.
Quote: I probably use scientific notation less often than most potential users of this calculator. Your suggestion has a lot of merit. What do others think? If you had to choose only one, which would you make unshifted: x<>y or EEX?
Quote: I'm confused because as per your suggestion above, there would not be an X<>Y key. Do you mean put the new EEX key at the bottom? With the SHIFT key at the bottom, it is close to often-used functions such as SQRT and RCL. Keeping it there seems to minimize finger travel.
Quote: INV R-P gives P-R. The other two conversions can also be inverted.
Quote:
It's like you were reading my mind. I had the same idea
Quote:
An ENG display mode could be set up using the DISP key. Re: revisted: the 4 banger+ - DaveJ - 06-24-2007 Quote: Yep, just my preference. As an electronics engineer, most calculations I do involve the EXP key.
Quote: Yes, sorry for the confusion. I just prefer it in that position, just like they have on the Casio's, I think it's a more sensible location. Kinda makes the key more important and prominate in that location.
Quote:
You'll never be able to suit everyone with this!
Quote: Of course. *embarrassed look*
Quote:
No, I'm not talking about an ENG display mode, I'm talking about an ENG display "function" that operates like the Casio calcs. i.e. scientific display is the normal "mode", but if you press ENG you convert that display into engineering notation. Press it again and the display shifts an extra 3 digits. Next operation causes the display to revert back to the usual display mode. BTW, the calc would of course not be as tall as the pictured unit, it would stop just at the top of the display.
Dave.
Re: revisted: the 4 banger+ - DaveJ - 06-24-2007 Quote:
I think one register is enough on a calc like this. I really like this calc, and I think it has more merit than any other "theoretical" calc proposed on here that I've seen. Compared with all those Voyager and HP35S variations etc, I'd buy this one instead!
Dave.
Re: revisted: the 4 banger+ - Paul Dale - 06-24-2007 Quote: Keep the x<>y unshifted. I use this significantly more than EEX (which I do use fairly often).
- Pauli
Re: revisted: the 4 banger+ - Paul Dale - 06-24-2007 Quote: Putting HYP in this unused slot would also be possible and in line with more normal scientific calculators. Not that I've ever used a hyperbolic function (excepting for a few of the challenges on this site). I do use normal curves from time to time and used them heaps when I was studying.
- Pauli
Re: revisted: the 4 banger+ - Paul Dale - 06-24-2007 Quote: This opens a realm of new possibilities. Not only freeing up the 4 key position by removing the need for INV, but we'd also gain roll up (shift shift X<>Y) and we can free up one of the shifted - or + keys since STO is the inverse of RCL :-)
- Pauli
Re: revisted: the 4 banger+ - Paul Guertin - 06-25-2007 Here's a new version.
Changes (hopefully improvements) from the 4S:
IAQ (Infrequently asked questions)
Re: revisted: the 4 banger+ - DaveJ - 06-25-2007 Quote: It has indeed transitioned into a proper scientific, and as such should have EEX as a primary key. The latest model is beautiful, just beautiful...
Dave.
Re: revisted: the 4 banger+ - Dave Shaffer (Arizona) - 06-25-2007 I like the looks and size, but ...
All those key combinations go against the idea of a "simple" 4-banger. If this is supposed to be simple, the average idiot (who is smart enought to know RPN!) should be able to pick it up and use it to its fullest without having to read the manual or ask somebody "what key do I press to get arcsin?" I don't find the concept of "The Q function" particularly simple/necessary, either. I've done a lot of scientific analysis and I never felt the urge to have normal curve integrals available on my calculator.
Re: revisted: the 4 banger+ - Paul Dale - 06-25-2007 Quote: No provision for ALL display mode like the 42s here. This is the mode I use by far the most.
Re: revisted: the 4 banger+ - Walter B - 06-26-2007 The longer I look at it the more it reminds me of the Sinclair Scientific: cute package design, extraordinary small, extensive use of SHIFT and INV. IMHO such a user interface will limit this model to a conspiratorial community of enlighted monks, who will press SHIFT SHIFT . SHIFT SHIFT +/- * SHIFT SHIFT ENTER EEX 4 humming happily to calculate the area of a circle with 4 decimals. Ommmmmmh ;-) Edited: 26 June 2007, 1:58 a.m.
Re: revisted: the 4 banger+ - Paul Dale - 06-26-2007 What about exchanging ln & e^x and log & 10^x then we've got e^x, 10^x & y^x next to each other and the inverse ln, log & log-base-y next to each other too. y^(1/x) isn't the inverse of y^x after all. I'm tending to agree with Walter on the complexity of entry... Still, I might look into implementing it :-)
MoHPC == CCEM - Paul Brogger - 06-26-2007 . . . or,
Quote:
Not far off the mark!
|