This is frustrating.
Can anyone tell me why I get "Solution not found" when I enter a value for N and solve for SOD (sum of digits):
sod=0xL(A:LOG(N)+1)+sigma(I:1:A:1:MOD(N:10)+0xL(N:IP(N/10)))
HP17bii+ solver question


« Next Oldest  Next Newest »

▼
02242007, 01:02 AM
This is frustrating. Can anyone tell me why I get "Solution not found" when I enter a value for N and solve for SOD (sum of digits): sod=0xL(A:LOG(N)+1)+sigma(I:1:A:1:MOD(N:10)+0xL(N:IP(N/10))) ▼
02242007, 06:36 AM
It works on both the HP200LX and HP17BII. It seems there is (or there was) a problem with L() and G() on the HP17BII+ : http://www.hpmuseum.org/cgisys/cgiwrap/hpmuseum/archv016.cgi?read=91896 http://www.hpmuseum.org/cgisys/cgiwrap/hpmuseum/archv014.cgi?read=67528 http://www.hpmuseum.org/cgisys/cgiwrap/hpmuseum/archv014.cgi?read=64409 Gerson. ▼
02242007, 10:59 AM
Thanks Gerson. Yes, I had noticed some of those threads before, and I guess I just hoped that the problems were fixed by now. I should have known better. You know, the beauty of computers and programming is (supposed to be) that they work the same way every time, with consistency, and according to their documentation. In my 33 years of programming on IBM, Univac, and DEC mainframes, that has been true. The only two cases where it was not true was with HP calculators; the original 12cp with 400 program steps that you could use only if you had no GTO's, and now the 17bii+. When a hobby is just frustrating, it's not a hobby anymore. I am returning to my 16c and my Martin guitar. ▼
02242007, 11:28 AM
When HP calculators become KinHPo calculators, sadly the attention to detail and quality simply evaporated. Buying a real 17bii is your only real option.
02242007, 11:56 AM
Quote: That's quite true!
Quote: At least that 12CP bug has been solved. If you want another example of lack of consistency between the 200LX and the HP17BII solvers, consider this equation:
COS=0*L(X:(1)^(L(Q:IP(ABS(L(X:MOD((90X):360)))/90))+ The HP200LX has no trouble solving for X, given COS. However, the HP17BII returns the complement of the expected answer. It started working only when +0*L(X:90X) was appended to the equation. This kind of thing is really frustrating. Regards, Gerson.
Edited: 24 Feb 2007, 11:58 a.m.
03062007, 06:48 AM
why did the framers made 
Possibly Related Threads...  
Thread  Author  Replies  Views  Last Post  
hpprime solver and variable name  fabrice48  22  4,375 
12102013, 03:25 AM Last Post: fabrice48 

HP Prime Triangle solver  BruceH  29  4,653 
11282013, 12:03 AM Last Post: Dale Reed 

Using units in Numeric Solver  Harold A Climer  1  701 
10132013, 10:44 AM Last Post: Tim Wessman 

Does Prime Have a Multiple Equation Solver?  Norman Dziedzic  2  761 
09202013, 09:43 AM Last Post: Norman Dziedzic 

Just a lazy solver algortihm  PGILLET  1  672 
06282013, 11:47 PM Last Post: Namir 

[43s] : How the solver will be implemented  Miguel Toro  3  951 
03142013, 06:09 PM Last Post: Walter B 

TVMSolver for the PC  fhub  14  2,381 
12262012, 03:24 PM Last Post: fhub 

[WP34s] New TVMsolver version  fhub  43  6,243 
12262012, 06:12 AM Last Post: fhub 

HPSolver  Mike (Stgt)  2  674 
10102012, 02:44 AM Last Post: Mike (Stgt) 

WP34S solver question  Reth  22  3,487 
07132012, 06:55 PM Last Post: Paul Dale 