Operator Precedence

[RavensFan]

---

@RTSLVU wrote:

---

@aputman wrote:

I'd be interested to see any calculator that interprets 1+2*8-6 as 1+(2*8)-6.  Calculators solve equations in the order they are input unless you have the ability to enter parentheses into the calculation.  IMHO, it's not a good calculator if it makes assumptions about what the operator wants, rather than doing what the operator says. 

---

aputman is correct here. 

If I enter 1+2*8-6 im my calculator it responds like this:

I enter 1+2 as soon as I hit * the calculator shows the answer for 1+2 (3)

I hit the 8 and the calculator shows 24

Finish with - 6 and the answer is 18

---

Can you show us a picture of your calculator?  Give us a make or model number?  It sounds like a cheap one.

Here is the calculator I bought back in 1986.  http://www.datamath.org/Sci/Slimline/TI-30SLR.htm  It used normal math order of operations.

[RTSLVU]

---

@RavensFan wrote:

---

@RTSLVU wrote:

---

@aputman wrote:

I'd be interested to see any calculator that interprets 1+2*8-6 as 1+(2*8)-6.  Calculators solve equations in the order they are input unless you have the ability to enter parentheses into the calculation.  IMHO, it's not a good calculator if it makes assumptions about what the operator wants, rather than doing what the operator says. 

---

aputman is correct here. 

If I enter 1+2*8-6 im my calculator it responds like this:

I enter 1+2 as soon as I hit * the calculator shows the answer for 1+2 (3)

I hit the 8 and the calculator shows 24

Finish with - 6 and the answer is 18

---

Can you show us a picture of your calculator?  Give us a make or model number?  It sounds like a cheap one.

Here is the calculator I bought back in 1986.  http://www.datamath.org/Sci/Slimline/TI-30SLR.htm  It used normal math order of operations.

---

Here you go:

 

Intresting to note if I place it in "Scientific" mode it solves it the way you would think 1+(2*8)-6

[RavensFan]

To answer the original question, assuming the OP is actually trying to use the Evaluate Formula String function.  It uses normal mat order of operations.

[RavensFan]

---

@RTSLVU wrote:

---

---

Here you go:

 

Intresting to note if I place it in "Scientific" mode it solves it the way you would think 1+(2*8)-6

---

I didn't even realize anyone was talking about the Windows calculator.  I thought we were talking about physical calculators.

That is interesting that MS decided to program the behavior of the cheap calculators into its calculator program in the "standard" view of the calculator, and the behavior of good, scientific calculators int the "scientific" view.

[crossrulz]

---

@RavensFan wrote:

Here is the calculator I bought back in 1986.  http://www.datamath.org/Sci/Slimline/TI-30SLR.htm  It used normal math order of operations.

---

Correction to the link (you had a couple of extra unprintable characters that messed it up): http://www.datamath.org/Sci/Slimline/TI-30SLR.htm

I had to use a TI-30XA in college due to a professor not wanting us to use "programmable" calculators.

[RTSLVU]

---

@RavensFan wrote:

I didn't even realize anyone was talking about the Windows calculator.  I thought we were talking about physical calculators.

That is interesting that MS decided to program the behavior of the cheap calculators into its calculator program in the "standard" view of the calculator, and the behavior of good, scientific calculators int the "scientific" view.

---

Well it's the only calculator I have anymore...

But yeah, who knows why MS did this. 

[crossrulz]

---

@RTSLVU wrote:

But yeah, who knows why MS did this. 

---

Because that is what the large majority of people expect.  That is also why MS added a "Scientic" and "Programmer" mode to the calculator for people like us.

[Yamaeda]

---

@RavensFan wrote:
 I thought we were talking about physical calculators.

That is interesting that MS decided to program the behavior of the cheap calculators into its calculator program in the "standard" view of the calculator, and the behavior of good, scientific calculators int the "scientific" view.

---

There is still a good number of cheap calculators out there, incl. the old mechanical ones, which work like the "standard" one. I agree it should be better named "old/direct" or similar.

I noticed the difference some 5 years ago when i got some strange results. 🙂

/Y

[RavensFan]

I'm not saying there aren't plenty of cheap calculators out there that do it in the order of entry.  I was replying to Aputman's earlier comment in message #7 that he hadn't seen a calculator do it in normal math order of operations, and even went to so far to suggest that such a calculator was wrong.  I would think anyone participating in these forums would have a technical background and would be quite familiar with the existence of scientific calculators.

[aputman]

---

@RavensFan wrote:

 I would think anyone participating in these forums would have a technical background and would be quite familiar with the existence of scientific calculators.

---

I would think anyone participating in these forums wouldn't have a "holier than thou" attitude that pisses everyone off but thanks for the clarification.  I never knew a calculator would do that and obviously there are other technically minded people here that didn't realize it either.