agknn Did not quite understand what exactly is plagiarized ...
Taking into account even external dissimilarity, it comes to the idea that the idea of ​​"tsiferki at the top, buttons at the bottom" ...
I’ve looked at the calculator for a long time before the idea of ​​developing this, but, frankly, I don’t even remember that now ...: blush:
According to your comments about CubeCalc:
Operation '^' Indeed, the logic (or rather, if the present recording on paper) should have a right-associative priority, but I checked this is considered on several calculators and was a little surprised ... Half of the 64 gave a result, half - 512. Moreover, my old favorite Chinese engineering CEDAR SC-502 gave a result of 64 (he also takes into account the priorities). And on the other side of the user, who does not think about the subtleties (and judging by the other calculators of it, few people think) Expected results 64. It is not surprising, since recording the linear (not on paper). I thought it might be worth making it optional :)
here 10 + 10% * 2 for some reason + has a higher priority than *
Because x + y% is not just an expression, but a solid construction and therefore it is perceived as (10 + 10%) * 2
Otherwise, it is not entirely clear what 10% is here 10+ (10% * 2). 10% from 100? But why? But I agree that the brain makes ... I don’t know yet what to do with it :)
When open bracket does not show results
Interesting offer. I see no obstacles to implementation. By the way, in CubeCalc for such purposes there is a convenient feature "retention '*' or '/'"
Indicate division by zero and even the position in which the error was planned in subsequent versions ... But since division by 0 is so important, then this is not a problem to add in the next version.
Thanks for the comments and suggestions.
PS: just came up with the idea that you meant%, talking about that calculator ...