( Parenthetical Issues ) yes, pun intended.

[Matt Agajanian]

Hello all.

Well, after fiddling with a TI-36X Pro for a week, I gotta tell you, my experiences with it have validated and reinforced my adherence to RPN/RPL.

One of the most glaring idiosyncracies of Algebraic and Direct Formula Entry (and variations thereof) which I have found most cumbersome, annoying and taxing is keeping track of parentheses openings and closures. Another point which adds to the confusion is the operational/keystroke characteristic of the '()' single stroke key. Rather than, as in the SR-52, SR-56 keyboard where each key was dedicated, it is now moreso of an incumberance to having to cope with parenthese placed where you might not need them. And then, you're faced with inserting/deleting the extraneous parentheses your formula does not need or in places you don't want.

After working with the 36X Pro and its other EOS/AOS quirks, I feel more justified and validated of RPN's efficiency, necessity and relevance as an essential calculator entry and logic system.

Edited: 8 Sept 2013, 9:52 p.m.

[Pier Aiello]

Why RPN (a selection)?

[Thomas Klemm]

The HP-48 has the same characteristic not only with '()' but also with '[]', '<<>>' and '{}'. It's helpful to enter something but a pain if you have to correct it. Therefore the usefulness is dependent on this ratio. Not really related to RPN vs. AOS in my opinion.

Cheers

Thomas

[Matt Agajanian]

Thanks for this observation. Now that I read this, I recall what it is about the '()', '[]', '{}' entry characteristic which made/makes the 48/50 series much more palatable. It's the usage of these in Equation Editor (rather than single line display) which makes the usage of these easier to keep track of. With the Equation Editor, it seems that parentheses positioning in the equation is much easier to visualise than to keep an eye on from a single-line perspective.

Thanks