On Fri, Mar 29, 2002 at 10:00:20PM -0800, Craig Dickson wrote: > begin Adam Majer quotation: > > > No!! There can't be an option. If a calculator does not follow > > precedence then there should be a grave bug against it. Why? Well, for > > starters, it would mean > > > > 2+3 != 3+2 > > Hardly. Ignoring precedence doesn't imply that addition isn't > commutative.
Well, try 2+1*3 and 1*3+2 both are euqal to 5 by any basic math operations I know of. by your method it means 2+1*3 = 3*3 = 9 but 1*3+2 = 3+2 = 5 but 9 != 5 hence not obeying precedence makes 3+2 != 2+3 - Adam PS. This is just one example that shows why any calculator not using precendence is crap. Plus on any calculator that does follow precedence, pressing = after each operation makes it behave like if it wasn't using precedence too. But that's normal behaviour. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
