This thread has long since diverged from Lorinda and her death. I'm fine
with a discussion of some of Lorinda's work, but let's talk about bc or dc
in a separate thread that has nothing to do with Lorinda.
On Tue, Mar 1, 2022 at 5:06 PM Terry Jones <terry(a)jon.es> wrote:
I’m also a fan of dc, and still a daily user after 40
years (not much in
this group, I know, but a pretty good chunk of my life at least).
To get more functionality, I wrote a Python RPN calculator (with some key
bindings identical to dc). It makes 300+ functions from standard Python
libraries directly available and you can push Python objects and functions
onto the stack. See
https://github.com/terrycojones/rpnpy
Terry
*From: *TUHS <tuhs-bounces(a)minnie.tuhs.org> on behalf of Brian Walden <
tuhs(a)cuzuco.com>
*Reply to: *Brian Walden <tuhs(a)cuzuco.com>
*Date: *Tuesday, 22. February 2022 at 01:02
*To: *<tuhs(a)minnie.tuhs.org>
*Subject: *[TUHS] Lorinda Cherry
I enjoy this dc(1) discussion. I am a daily dc user, and since my fisrt
calculator was an HP-45 (circa 1973) RPN felt right. However I think
dc pre-dates ALL HP calculators, since there was one in the 1st Edition
written in assembly.
I extened my version of dc (way before gnu existed)
based on common buttons I used from HP calculators:
CMD WHAT
# comment, to new line
~ change sign of top of stack (CHS key)
| 1/top of stack (1/x key)
e push 99 digits of e (2.718..) on the stack
@ push 99 digits of pi on the stack (looks like a circle)
r reverse top of stack (x<>y key)
I had been fascinated with pi stemimg from the Star Trek epsiode Wolf
in the Fold where Spock uses it to usa all computing power
"Computer, this is a Class A compulsory directive. Compute to
the last digit the value of pi."
"As we know, the value of pi is a transcendental figure without
resolution. The computer banks will work on this problem to the
exclusion of all else until we order it to stop."
As it was supposed to be "arbitrary precision" here was my tool.
So I wrote Machin formula in dc slowing increasing the scale and printing
the results. In the orginal dc, yes the whole part was arbitrary, but the
decimal part (scale) was limited to 99. Well that became a disappiontment.
(this program is lost to time)
So I decided to rewrite it but increasing pi as a whole numbers instead
of increasing scale (ex. 31415, 314159, 3141592, ... etc)
I still have that program which is simply this --
[sxln_1ll*dsllb*dszli2+dsi5li^*/+dsn4*lelzli239li^*/+dse-dlx!=Q]sQ
1[ddsb5/sn239/se1ddsisllQx4*pclb10*lPx]dsPx
if you run it you'll notice the last 1 to 2 digits are wrong due to
precision.
The next problem became small memory. I still have thes saved output before
it crashed at 1024 digits. No idea what specs of the machine it was run
on anymore its really old --
3141592653589793238462643383279502884197169399375105820974944592307816\
4062862089986280348253421170679821480865132823066470938446095505822317\
2535940812848111745028410270193852110555964462294895493038196442881097\
5665933446128475648233786783165271201909145648566923460348610454326648\
2133936072602491412737245870066063155881748815209209628292540917153643\
6789259036001133053054882046652138414695194151160943305727036575959195\
3092186117381932611793105118548074462379962749567351885752724891227938\
1830119491298336733624406566430860213949463952247371907021798609437027\
7053921717629317675238467481846766940513200056812714526356082778577134\
2757789609173637178721468440901224953430146549585371050792279689258923\
5420199561121290219608640344181598136297747713099605187072113499999983\
7297804995105973173281609631859502445945534690830264252230825334468503\
5261931188171010003137838752886587533208381420617177669147303598253490\
4287554687311595628638823537875937519577818577805321712268066130019278\
76611195909216420198938095257201065485862972
out of space: salloc
all 8587356 rel 8587326 headmor 1
nbytes -28318
stk 71154 rd 125364 wt 125367 beg 125364 last 125367
83 11 0
30 IOT trap - core dumped
But I was much happier with that.
On a side note: programming dc is hard. There was no comment character.
And it's a pain to read, and it's a pain to debug.
When I discovered the Chudnovsky algorithm for pi, of course I implemented
it
in dc --
[0ksslk3^16lkd12+sk*-lm*lhd1+sh3^/smlx_262537412640768000*sxll545140134+dsllm*lxlnk/ls+dls!=P]sP
7sn[6sk1ddshsxsm13591409dsllPx10005v426880*ls/K3-k1/pcln14+snlMx]dsMx
At 99 digits of scale it ran out in 7 rounds, but now with that limitation
removed and large memeories it just goes on and on.....
-Brian
PS: Thanks for the fast OpenBSD version of dc, Otto.
Otto Moerbeek wrote:
On Thu, Feb 17, 2022 at 01:44:07PM -0800, Bakul Shah wrote:
On Feb 17, 2022, at 1:18 PM, Dave Horsfall
<dave at horsfall.org> wrote:
>
> On Thu, 17 Feb 2022, Tom Ivar Helbekkmo via
TUHS wrote:
>
>> Watching the prime number generator
(from the Wikipedia page on dc)
>> running on the 11/23 is much more
entertaining than doing it on the
>> modern workstation I'm typing this
on:
>>
>>
2p3p[dl!d2+s!%0=@l!l^!<#]s#[s/0ds^]s@[p]s&[ddvs^3s!l#x0<&2+l.x]ds.x
>
> Wow... About 10s on my old MacBook Pro, and
I gave up on my ancient
> FreeBSD box.
That may be because FreeBSD continues computing
primes while the MacOS
dc gives up after a while!
freebsd (ryzen 2700 3.2Ghz): # note: I
interrupted dc after a while
$ command time dc <<<
'2p3p[dl!d2+s!%0=@l!l^!<#]s#[s/0ds^]s@[p]s&[ddvs^3s!l#x0<&2+l.x]ds.x'
xxx
^C 11.93 real 11.79 user
0.13 sys
$ wc xxx
47161 47161 319109 xxx
$ size `which dc`
text data bss dec hex
filename
238159 2784 11072 252015 0x3d86f
/usr/bin/dc
MacOS (m1 pro, prob. 2Ghz)
$ command time dc <<<
'2p3p[dl!d2+s!%0=@l!l^!<#]s#[s/0ds^]s@[p]s&[ddvs^3s!l#x0<&2+l.x]ds.x'
xxx
time: command terminated abnormally
1.00 real 0.98 user 0.01
sys
[2] 37135 segmentation fault command time dc
<<< > xxx
$ wc xxx
7342 7342 42626 xxx
$ size `which dc`
__TEXT __DATA __OBJC others dec hex
32768 16384 0 4295016448
4295065600 100018000
MacOS uses the GNU implementation which has a long standing issue with
deep recursion. It even cannot handle the tail recursive calls used
here and will run out of its stack.
-Otto