Version: 0.9 (using KDE 4.4.2) OS: Linux there is no way to do a*10^-b or 3e-2 it simply ignores the operation Reproducible: Always Steps to Reproduce: try 3e-2 or 3 X*10^Y -1 Actual Results: ignoring the e operation at all and doing the -b Expected Results: a*10^-b = a/(10^b) OS: Linux (i686) release 2.6.33.4-95.fc13.i686.PAE Compiler: gcc
Why a*10^-b is a/(10^b)? I think it should be 1/((a * 10)^b).
LOL my mistake. you are right. a^-b = 1/(a^b)
re-reading what I posted earlier, Expected Results: a*10^-b = a/(10^b) that is correct. if you write 5e-3 which is 5*10^-3 you mean 5/1000 or 0.005 and not 1/((a * 10)^b) which in this case would be 1/((5 * 10)^3)=1/(50^3)=1/125000 as written in comment #1
5e-3 is a standard of representing number so only one interpretation must be. a*10^-b in math is (a * 10) ^ (-b). It's depend on what priority of making operation.
please try to put that expression 5*10^-3 in Google for example... or any pocket calculator that allow entering the whole operation. tell me which one you got, 0.005 I guess.
Yes. It's ok because the operation ^ (pow) has the higher priority than * (mult).
With the mouse: "5" "x*10^y" "3" "+/-" "=" With the keyboard: "5" "e" "3" "\" "=" In both cases, I get "0.005". "\" is documented as the "change sign" keyboard shortcut in the handbook.
why can't it be just like any other calculator? why the need for different convention? this is not intuitive, and with all the respect, I don't believee that I would have to read a manual\documentation to operate a calculator.
The aim was to emulate how a desktop calculator worked at the time it was written. Those had separate "-" and "+/-" keys, and the key to change the sign of a number only worked AFTER you typed the number. Of course, today's calculators are different. If you want to help modernize kcalc, please provide patches.
well, as much as I like programming this is inventing the wheel for no good reason. I have installed and now testing gcalctool 5.30.1 under FC13 kde 4.4.2 and it runs perfectly and provide better (in my opinion) and more intuitive approach. so far I see more functionality in gcalctool then in kcalc, and no reason why not using it over kcalc. so I think I'll simply stick with it. best regards.
*** Bug 347604 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***