jacek.generowicz at cern.ch
Tue Jul 6 13:26:07 CEST 2004
hungjunglu at yahoo.com (Hung Jung Lu) writes:
> In the early days of pocket calculators, Texas Instruments had all
> these RPN (reverse Polish notation) models.
Wasn't it HP ?
> Now, many people argued that computationally RPN made more
> sense. But the market has spoken otherwise.
The market has spoken. Microsoft Windows is the best operating system.
> No matter how much sense it may make in theory, in practice the
> majority of people will NOT buy nor use a RPN calculator.
While power users will.
> Sure, there are always going to be those that stick with RPN
> calculators and praise their structuredness to no end.
> In academia all this is fine and dandy. In business, igonoring
> user-friendliness means... well, no business. RPN calculators are a
> good example.
User friendliness to whom ? RPN calculators are extremely
user-friendly to power-users of calculators.
> Trust me.
I'll pass on this one. I prefer to think for myself, rather than
trusting people ... particularly people who give an impression of not
being particularly well informed in the very same post in which they
tell me to trust them :-)
> Codeblocks, not Lisp/Scheme's PN expressions,
Never heard of PN expressions. Please enlighten me.
> are the way of the future. It's very simple logic: people want
> machines to act more like people,
That's not logic; that's an unfounded claim.
> they don't want to be told to act more like machines.
Who are these "people"? You seem to be suggesting that the qualities
that Joe Windoze User seeks in a computer are the same that a skilled
programmer seeks in a computer.
Methinks you need to think again.
More information about the Python-list