Ma Be wrote in USMA 18194: >On Tue, 12 Feb 2002 23:39:59 > kilopascal wrote: >>2002-02-12 >> >>I had forgotten, but I have a calculator than can do fractional math. It is >>a Casio fx-911D Scientific Calculator. I played with it for a while and I >>must admit, it is very complex and time consuming to do the numeric entries. >>It does not force results to binary fractions. If you add 1-3/4 to 3-3/5, >>you get 7-7/20. You can even press a button to convert it to 107/20. >> >>If you add a decimal to a fraction, the result is a decimal. There is >>suppose to be a way to convert fractions to decimals and back, but since I >>lose the manual, I don't know how to do it. I don't know if this calculator >>qualifies as the type Marcus is referring to. >>... >No, evidently not! I do own one of these scientific calculators (it's a >Casio, too, BTW!...), but they NEVER stick to binary fractions >*necessarily* though. There is a tremendous challenge to setup the >"logic" behind doing that. When it comes to doing ordinary fractional >operations that is not terribly difficult to setup since there is an >unquestionable rule on how to do those. Just program the gizmo to perform >that and you're ok. However, there is no such clear-cut way to handle >conversions *when* you must present results in binary fractional form! >The issue of accuracy of the resulting fraction is what poses that >challenge. Depending on the value to be converted the machine would >probably have to test several options until it can "decide" on how to >present the final binary fraction result. > >Marcus
The Casio fractional calculators when working with fractions give a true result in common or vulgar fractional form, *not* necessarily in binary fractional form. The answer in the example that Kilopascal gives above is a common fractioin, not a binary fraction. Joseph B.Reid 17 Glebe Road West Toronto M5P 1C8 TEL. 416-486-6071
