3 ms·

Wait, isn't this the calculator that doesn't know order of operations? When I used to teach math, I would tell my students to type in 1+2*3 in their calculator

by dhosek 6y ago

Wait, isn't this the calculator that doesn't know order of operations? When I used to teach math, I would tell my students to type in 1+2*3 in their calculator and if it didn't give 7 as the answer, they should throw it away. The Windows calculator was one of the ones that failed, if I remember correctly.

stu2b50 6y ago
Rather than not knowing order of operations, it doesn't parse algebraic expressions, it just takes binary inputs for the common real operations. It doesn't operate on "1+23" as an input, it operates on "1", "+", "2" = 3 "" "3" = 9.
Snitch-Thursday 6y ago
I'm running calc.exe from Ye Olde Windows days, not this fluent-UI 'refresh', and it gave me 9. Feeding it 1 + (2*3) produced 7.
treesprite82 6y ago
Windows 10 calculator has a simple mode where operations are evaluated immediately which would give 9 for those keystrokes, but does at least show what it's actually calculating: https://i.imgur.com/au7dvfg.png https://i.imgur.com/au7dvfg.png In scientific mode you can enter the full expression and get 7: https://i.imgur.com/DT6LNKb.png https://i.imgur.com/DT6LNKb.png
contextfree 6y ago
It works like you say in standard mode by design because it's trying to match the behavior of older desk calculators that worked that way. In scientific mode it respects order of operations. There's a proposal to change the UI to make this clearer: https://github.com/microsoft/calculator-specs/blob/247bbb50d6d7f1d02410e967673a7ae095778d4f/active/TransactionalHistory/README.md https://github.com/microsoft/calculator-specs/blob/247bbb50d...
- dhosek 6y ago
  It seems absurd to make the default behavior incorrect because older cheap calculators did the wrong thing. This isn't like making an incompatible change to a programming language to fix an incorrect behavior, this is more like if the designer of a new programming language decided to make 1+2*3 give nine because his cheap desktop calculator did the same.
  - treesprite82 6y ago
    I've found that a surprising number of people (outside of fields like math, engineering, programming) are used to the idea of entering an operation and having it applied to the current value. E.G: pressing the [√] button immediately square roots the current number, pressing [X][2] doubles the current number, etc. It's a different paradigm to using the buttons to enter a full expression then pressing [=] to evaluate it, but I don't think it's accurate to call it "the wrong thing" - just that the button presses aren't transcribing to the equation you expect (the equation actually displayed by Windows 10 calculator is now accurate).

by dhosek 6y ago

stu2b50 6y ago

Rather than not knowing order of operations, it doesn't parse algebraic expressions, it just takes binary inputs for the common real operations. It doesn't operate on "1+23" as an input, it operates on "1", "+", "2" = 3 "" "3" = 9.

Snitch-Thursday 6y ago

I'm running calc.exe from Ye Olde Windows days, not this fluent-UI 'refresh', and it gave me 9. Feeding it 1 + (2*3) produced 7.

treesprite82 6y ago

Windows 10 calculator has a simple mode where operations are evaluated immediately which would give 9 for those keystrokes, but does at least show what it's actually calculating: https://i.imgur.com/au7dvfg.png https://i.imgur.com/au7dvfg.png In scientific mode you can enter the full expression and get 7: https://i.imgur.com/DT6LNKb.png https://i.imgur.com/DT6LNKb.png

contextfree 6y ago

It works like you say in standard mode by design because it's trying to match the behavior of older desk calculators that worked that way. In scientific mode it respects order of operations. There's a proposal to change the UI to make this clearer: https://github.com/microsoft/calculator-specs/blob/247bbb50d6d7f1d02410e967673a7ae095778d4f/active/TransactionalHistory/README.md https://github.com/microsoft/calculator-specs/blob/247bbb50d...

dhosek 6y ago
It seems absurd to make the default behavior incorrect because older cheap calculators did the wrong thing. This isn't like making an incompatible change to a programming language to fix an incorrect behavior, this is more like if the designer of a new programming language decided to make 1+2*3 give nine because his cheap desktop calculator did the same.
- treesprite82 6y ago
  I've found that a surprising number of people (outside of fields like math, engineering, programming) are used to the idea of entering an operation and having it applied to the current value. E.G: pressing the [√] button immediately square roots the current number, pressing [X][2] doubles the current number, etc. It's a different paradigm to using the buttons to enter a full expression then pressing [=] to evaluate it, but I don't think it's accurate to call it "the wrong thing" - just that the button presses aren't transcribing to the equation you expect (the equation actually displayed by Windows 10 calculator is now accurate).