OS 5.2 for the TI-84 Plus CE: New TI-BASIC Commands
» >
» Goto page Previous  1, 2
» View previous topic :: View next topic  

Will you make TI-BASIC programs that use the OS 5.2 tokens (and thus require OS 5.2)?
Yes; I'm not worried about backwards compatibility (but I have comments, discussed in my post below).
 76%  [ 19 ]
No; I'm worried about backwards compatibility (or some other concern, discussed in my post below).
 16%  [ 4 ]
Neither of these is the right one, and I'll tell you why below.
 8%  [ 2 ]
Total Votes : 25

Michael2_3B wrote:
Very nice! However there's still no way to directly calculate a string and give the answer back as a string, so you have to do a conjunction like this:

Code:

eval(expr("1+1

Essentially converting a string to an expression, calculating that expression, and converting the answer back to a string.

Still better than

Code:
:{0,1→L₁
:{0,expr("1+1→L₂
:LinReg(ax+b) Y₁
:Equ►String(Y₁,Str1
:sub(Str1,1,length(Str1)-3→Str1
Wink
mr womp womp wrote:
Still better than

Code:
:{0,1→L₁
:{0,expr("1+1→L₂
:LinReg(ax+b) Y₁
:Equ►String(Y₁,Str1
:sub(Str1,1,length(Str1)-3→Str1
Wink
Don't forget about NumToString in the Celtic libraries. Wink In all seriousness, I'm really glad the OS finally has this built-in.
Geopipe
In my email to TI I reported that _os_GetDrawBGColor was broken because of a insufficient suffix on a load operation. It has since been fixed as of OS 5.2, and now will properly work. I'll make a note of it in the include file and on WikiTI.
MateoConLechuga wrote:
In my email to TI I reported that _os_GetDrawBGColor was broken because of a insufficient suffix on a load operation. It has since been fixed as of OS 5.2, and now will properly work. I'll make a note of it in the include file and on WikiTI.


If you're refering to DispGraph:While 1:BackgroundOn 10:BackgroundOn 11:End, then it still doesn't refresh the screen content properly, so it's not really fixed if that's the case.
DJ_O wrote:
MateoConLechuga wrote:
In my email to TI I reported that _os_GetDrawBGColor was broken because of a insufficient suffix on a load operation. It has since been fixed as of OS 5.2, and now will properly work. I'll make a note of it in the include file and on WikiTI.


If you're refering to DispGraph:While 1:BackgroundOn 10:BackgroundOn 11:End, then it still doesn't refresh the screen content properly, so it's not really fixed if that's the case.

I'm not. I'm referring to the C function they have in the OS.
I'm curious as to the cost of those new commands.
Disclaimer: I am a robot.

I'm done here.
oldmud0 wrote:
I'm curious as to the cost of those new commands.


The cost? Like what they had to pay the developers to fix up the OS?
Is whoever owns tibasicdev working on updating the command lists for this new OS?
So we established on SAX:
eval(:
  • Only works with real numbers
  • Does not accept strings
  • Ignores mode changes
  • Does not take Lists and Matrices as Input

toString(:
  • Does accept imaginary numbers
  • Does not accept strings
  • Takes mode changes into account
  • Takes Lists and Matrices as Input
  • Faster than eval
Thinking about math....or C++
Given that eval() is very similar to toString() and they can sometimes be interchanged, I went ahead and compared the speed of the two (since speed is the only difference sometimes)

result: to my surprise, tostring() is slightly faster than eval() (about 15%, but speed is mostly dependent on what exactly is being stringified, for example, eval(A+2^2-1/sin(34)) takes 3.85 times longer than eval(A)).
Here are the times I got by taking the average of 200 evals and 200 tostrings using PT_'s timer

However, if you consider the speed of the CE, it really doesn't matter, eval(A) takes 4.8 ms while toString(A) takes 4.0 ms, I really doubt a fraction of a millisecond is worth considering when programming unless your program looks a little like this...
Code:
For(A,1,10000
eval(A
End
In which case you will save about 8 seconds by using toString Razz
Domino 464 wrote:
oldmud0 wrote:
I'm curious as to the cost of those new commands.


The cost? Like what they had to pay the developers to fix up the OS?


No, cost as in cc (CPU cycles).
Disclaimer: I am a robot.

I'm done here.
Is it just me, in mathprint mode, or am I correct in noticing that if you use the derivative function [math][8] and click the X,T,θ,n button for the d/dx, it doesn't work? I was pretty sure it used to. You have to click sto-> now for it to input X.
Thinking about math....or C++
seanlego23 wrote:
Is it just me, in mathprint mode, or am I correct in noticing that if you use the derivative function [math][8] and click the X,T,θ,n button for the d/dx, it doesn't work? I was pretty sure it used to. You have to click sto-> now for it to input X.


I think it was always finicky like that. A similar behavior was present with the sigma (summation) function.
Disclaimer: I am a robot.

I'm done here.
oldmud0 wrote:
seanlego23 wrote:
Is it just me, in mathprint mode, or am I correct in noticing that if you use the derivative function [math][8] and click the X,T,θ,n button for the d/dx, it doesn't work? I was pretty sure it used to. You have to click sto-> now for it to input X.


I think it was always finicky like that. A similar behavior was present with the sigma (summation) function.

But I have used the sigma function since last year, and I never, ever hit the sto-> button for the variable X. I think this is a bug.
Thinking about math....or C++
seanlego23 wrote:
Is it just me, in mathprint mode, or am I correct in noticing that if you use the derivative function [math][8] and click the X,T,θ,n button for the d/dx, it doesn't work? I was pretty sure it used to. You have to click sto-> now for it to input X.

This seems to work fine for me... I also tried with all the function types and it also worked.
  
Register to Join the Conversation
Have your own thoughts to add to this or any other topic? Want to ask a question, offer a suggestion, share your own programs and projects, upload a file to the file archives, get help with calculator and computer programming, or simply chat with like-minded coders and tech and calculator enthusiasts via the site-wide AJAX SAX widget? Registration for a free Cemetech account only takes a minute.

» Go to Registration page
OS 5.2 for the TI-84 Plus CE: New TI-BASIC Commands
» Goto page Previous  1, 2
» View previous topic :: View next topic  
Page 2 of 2
» All times are UTC - 5 Hours
 
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum

 

Advertisement