Talk:Programmable calculator

New picture
I do hope that nobody is opposed to the change in picture. I feel that it not only is a better quality screenshot, but better shows the capabilites of calculator programs. --Lewk_of_S e rthic contrib talk 03:13, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Ti-89 game.png
Image:Ti-89 game.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 02:37, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

The most common languages now used in calculator programming are BASIC-style
I don't this this is correct. Lets see:


 * HP used RPL (programming language) which is closer to Forth then BASIC. For high end devices - the newest mid-range the HP 35s is pure key stroke programmable.
 * TI uses TI-BASIC - but follow the link and you see it is not BASIC at all.
 * Casio uses a "BASIC - like" language but have a look at the Manual and you see it is keystroke programming with "if then else".

I think the time of the true BASIC programmable calculators (where Hello word was ) is is fact over and the three main calculator vendors have move to prohibitory programming languages two of which are called BASIC for pure marketing reasons. At least HP is honest with RPL.

The same goes for C_(programming_language) for calculators - Casio had a few of those. But they are not produced any longer. I suggest that the whole chapter is redone to better reflect past and present.

Personal Opinion: The true BASIC programmable calculators had only a short window of opportunity were they where needed. After which PDA's (PSION, Palm) took over non numeric tasks and calculators made step back to there roots: calculating.

--Krischik T 12:47, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

Turing-complete
I think the article of touring completeness is wrong as well. Any calculator which supported indirect addressing and approximately a hundred steps could be used to implement the Universal_Turing_machine and hence would be Turing-complete. flat or memory is not needed. --Krischik T 18:56, 25 March 2009 (UTC)


 * I have done a lot of research and editing in the area now - And I now think that 70 to 80% of Keystroke programmable calculators where Turing complete. That is: the design is complete Turing complete. Implementations are never Turing complete as Turing completeness assumes unlimited memory. So the questions must be: If memory was unlimited could you implement a touring machine?  --Krischik T 18:45, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

Most did not have any kind of program storage or transfer
And this is wrong as well. Yes there was models like the casio fx-180p but mostly it was the Casio FX-602P series, the HP-41 and the TI-59 - and they all had external permanent storage. The "most" is the other way round. --Krischik T 19:03, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

hallo
im a visual basic student in my freshman year n trying to find out the many aims of creating a scientific calculator  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.220.227.174 (talk) 06:37, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

The definition in article does not clearly classify devices.
For example, does Micro-Professor MPF-I apply to Programmable Calculators? Halfcookie (talk) 20:51, 10 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Is it a calculator? Is it programmable? Is anyone confused? --Wtshymanski (talk) 21:36, 16 November 2022 (UTC)