this post was submitted on 03 Dec 2023
418 points (100.0% liked)

196

16244 readers
2080 users here now

Be sure to follow the rule before you head out.

Rule: You must post before you leave.

^other^ ^rules^

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Pavidus@lemmy.world 98 points 9 months ago (4 children)

There's quite a few calculators that get this wrong. In college, I found out that Casio calculators do things the right way, are affordable, and readily available. I stuck with it through the rest of my classes.

[–] queue@lemmy.blahaj.zone 52 points 9 months ago (4 children)

Casio does a wonderful job, and it's a shame they aren't more standard in American schooling. Texas Instruments costs more of the same jobs, and is mandatory for certain systems or tests. You need to pay like $40 for a calculator that hasn't changed much if at all from the 1990's.

Meanwhile I have a Casio fx-115ES Plus and it does everything that one did, plus some nice quality of life features, for less money.

[–] burgersc12@sh.itjust.works 33 points 9 months ago

$40??!! My ti that was required was like over $200!!

[–] cerement@slrpnk.net 24 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

TI did the same thing Quark and Adobe did later on – got dominance in their markets, killed off their competition, and then sat back and rested on their laurels thinking they were untouchable

EDIT: although in part, we should thank TI for one thing – if they hadn’t monopolized the calculator market, Commodore would’ve gone into calculators instead of computers

[–] AceFuzzLord@lemm.ee 7 points 9 months ago

If you're lucky, you can find these TI calculators in thrift shops or other similar places. I've been lucky since I got both of my last 2 graphing calculators at a yard sale and thrift shop respectively, for maybe around $40-$50 for both.

[–] zourn@lemmy.world 4 points 9 months ago

The TI equivalent to the Casio fx-115ES Plus is the TI-36X Pro, and they both cost $20 at Walmart.

[–] SmartmanApps@programming.dev 2 points 6 months ago

Sharp as well.

[–] SmartmanApps@programming.dev 2 points 6 months ago

Ditto for Sharp. It's really only Texas Instruments that is the ongoing exception to the rule.

[–] Limitless_screaming@kbin.social 0 points 9 months ago (4 children)

My Casio calculators get this wrong, even the newer ones. BTW the correct answer is 16, right?

[–] SmartmanApps@programming.dev 2 points 6 months ago

the correct answer is 16, right?

No, the correct answer is 1.

[–] Th0rgue@lemmy.world 0 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (1 children)

Depends on the system you use. Most common system worldwide and in the academic circles (the oldest of the two) has 1 as the answer.

[–] SmartmanApps@programming.dev 1 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

Depends on the system you use

There are no other systems - only people who are following the actual rules of Maths and those who aren't. And yes, 1 is the correct answer

[–] cerement@slrpnk.net 0 points 9 months ago (2 children)
  • 16 is the right answer if you use PEMDAS only: (8 ÷ 2) × (2 + 2)
  • 1 is the right answer if you use implicit/explicit with PEMDAS: 8 ÷ (2 × (2 + 2))
  • both are correct answers (as in if you don’t put in extra parentheses to reduce ambiguity, you should expect expect either answer)
  • this is also one of the reasons why postfix and prefix notations have an advantage over infix notation
    • postfix (HP, RPN, Forth): 2 2 + 8 2 ÷ × .
    • prefix (Lisp): (× (÷ 8 2) (+ 2 2))
[–] SmartmanApps@programming.dev 2 points 6 months ago

16 is the right answer if you use PEMDAS only: (8 ÷ 2) × (2 + 2)

You added brackets and changed the answer. 2(2+2) is a single term, and if you break it up then you change the answer (because now the (2+2) is in the numerator instead of in the denominator).

1 is the right answer

The only right answer

both are correct answers

Nope, 1 is the only correct answer.

this is also one of the reasons why postfix and prefix notations have an advantage over infix notation

Except they don't. This isn't a notation problem, it's a people don't remember the rules of Maths problem.

[–] brian@programming.dev 0 points 9 months ago (1 children)

prefix notation doesn't need parentheses either though, at least in this case. lisp uses them for readability and to get multiple arity operators. infix doesn't have any ambiguity either if you parenthesize all operations like that.

[–] SmartmanApps@programming.dev 2 points 6 months ago

infix doesn’t have any ambiguity either if you parenthesize all operations like that

There isn't any ambiguity even if you don't.

[–] KoalaUnknown@lemmy.world 0 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (2 children)

Yes

8 / 2 (2+2)

8 / 2 (4)

4 (4)

16

[–] 4am@lemm.ee 1 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (1 children)

No

8 / 2 (2+2)

8 / 2 (4)

8 / 8

1

[–] Coreidan@lemmy.world 1 points 9 months ago (2 children)

No. Order of operations is left to right, not right to left. 1 is wrong.

[–] SmartmanApps@programming.dev 1 points 6 months ago

Order of operations is left to right

Order of operations is BEDMAS, THEN left to right within each operator.

1 is wrong

1 is the only correct answer.

[–] 50MYT@aussie.zone 1 points 9 months ago (3 children)

Pemdas.

Multiplication comes before division.

1 is the correct answer.

[–] kryptonianCodeMonkey@lemmy.world 1 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

That's wrong. Multiplication and division have equal precedence, same as addition and subtraction. You do them left to right. PEMDAS could be rewritten like PE(MD)(AS). After parentheses and exponents, it"s Multiplication and division together, then addition and subtraction together. They also teach BODMAS some places, which is "brackets, order, division and multiplication, addition and subtraction" Despite reversing the division and multiplication, it doesn't change the order of operations. They have the same priority, so they are just done left to right. PEMDAS and BODMAS are the different shorthand for the same order of operations.

[–] SmartmanApps@programming.dev 1 points 6 months ago

1 is the correct answer, but it's because Brackets comes before Division - there is no Multiplication in this problem.

[–] 0ops@lemm.ee 0 points 9 months ago (1 children)

There's an argument to be made that implicit multiplication comes before division, resulting in the answer 1, but all multiplication? That's wrong, full-stop. You calculate (explicit) multiplication and division in one step, left to right. Reason being that division is technically just multiplying by the reciprocal.

[–] SmartmanApps@programming.dev 1 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Yes

No.

8 / 2 (4) 8/(2x4) 8/8 1