Rendered at 12:39:58 GMT+0000 (Coordinated Universal Time) with Cloudflare Workers.
Gormo 10 hours ago [-]
I've been using it for years and was surprised to see a new version after a dacade.
After installing it, I was surprised to see that the immediate changes most noticeable to me were that the input box was unnecessarily doubled in size, enclosed in an unnecessary border, and surrounded by unnecessary dead space; and that there's now marked input lag that never existed in the original version.
I never had a single problem with 0.12 over the past ten years, and use it nearly every day -- no bugs, no missing features.
I appreciate the desire to improve and innovate, but you know, sometimes, software really is finished.
stormking 2 hours ago [-]
I like the UI changers. But how do I select a different font?
academicfish 8 hours ago [-]
Personally, I like it. And there's also an option to go back to classic view for some things.
KetoManx64 7 hours ago [-]
Does it fix the input lag?
ErrorNoBrain 3 hours ago [-]
Just FYI you can still download the older versions on their site
electroglyph 4 hours ago [-]
same, not a fan of the new icon tbh
cipriantitire 3 hours ago [-]
[flagged]
eviks 7 hours ago [-]
> sometimes, software really is finished.
That's never the case for any consumer app, the potential for improvement in UI is practically infinite. But also, just use the old version if it's finished, you don't need to upgrade?
(this app has plenty of bugs / missing issues just like everything else, for example, blurry text on some platforms)
Gormo 6 hours ago [-]
> That's never the case for any consumer app, the potential for improvement in UI is practically infinite.
If that's true, how do you explain the observable pattern of many consumer applications degrading in UI functionality and coherence after a certain point?
> But also, just use the old version if it's finished, you don't need to upgrade?
Exactly. I reverted to 0.12.
chilmers 46 minutes ago [-]
> If that's true, how do you explain the observable pattern of many consumer applications degrading in UI functionality and coherence after a certain point?
Most consumer software in developed under the assumption that features only have a cost when being built. Their maintenance cost, and the combinatorial complexity each new feature adds, is barely considered. As a result, software teams add complexity at a speed that exceeds the rate at which the team's size, and the volume of work it can handle, grows. Eventually this reaches a critical threshold and the quality of the software starts to decline. But this doesn't mean the software couldn't still be improved, just that there isn't the resource available to do so.
jstummbillig 5 hours ago [-]
> If that's true, how do you explain the observable pattern of many consumer applications degrading in UI functionality and coherence after a certain point?
Well, that's easy: Bad choices. The better something is, the easier it is to change it in a way, that makes it worse.
I agree with GP, everything can be improved, but that doesn't mean that you will succeed, or that you should try, for various, separate reasons.
terlisimo 22 minutes ago [-]
speedcrunch is wonderful but I had this pet peeve with it where it had a hardcoded limit of 5 digits before it drops to scientific notation. Not very useful for shell scripts and programming.
I opened an issue while it was on bitbucket, but the response was something "yeah, that's intentional".
I see they bumped it to 14 digits now.
for years I've had a custom build of it with
src/math/hmath.cpp:
- if (expd > 5)
+ if (expd > 25)
blessed be the open source!
jiehong 16 hours ago [-]
List of changes for this calculator [0].
I used to use it quite a bit, but I now gravitate towards numbat instead [1].
This is nice to see, and it looks like this release (and maybe some earlier ones?) includes a small order of operations bug fix that hadn't been released for a long time. 1/2(-9.8) now equals -4.9 rather than -0.05102040816326530612. I like how the expression also renders with a multiplication symbol to clarify: 1 / 2 × (−9.8)
Jaxkr 12 hours ago [-]
This is such an ambiguous formula. It reminds me of those order-of-operations social media engagement baits.
dataflow 14 hours ago [-]
> 1/2(-9.8) now equals -4.9 rather than -0.05102040816326530612
That should really be an error.
simsla 2 hours ago [-]
Order of operations is clear. Division and multiplication have the same order and are evaluated left to right.
-4.9 is unequivocally correct.
kstrauser 9 hours ago [-]
[dead]
eviks 7 hours ago [-]
[dead]
triilman 2 hours ago [-]
Just try this one. There will be some big update from the developer.
A calculator without source available? In this day and age?? Did I miss something? I searched, but no sign of a repo.
Looked cool, but not that cool.
andix 10 hours ago [-]
I'm using it for a long time already. 1.0 and 1.1 are the first updates after 10 years now?
sammy2255 12 hours ago [-]
Love speedcrunch it has been sitting on my taskbar for many years always my go-to for quick scratchpad for equations, etc.
caterama 6 hours ago [-]
Huge fan of SpeedCrunch!! Was sad to see the formula was somewhat recently disabled on brew: https://formulae.brew.sh/cask/speedcrunch ... anyone know if this means it could be re-enabled?
Amazing!
This is the most useful calculator.. bit shifts..radix conversations...
I've been using it for years after struggling missing the windows 2000 calculator.
smusamashah 14 hours ago [-]
I recently opened a github issue about the system UI looking dark. I got a response an hour later which appears to be AI written, I responded to it and it looks like my request has been accepted.
I absolutely do not mind it being AI driven. I have not seen this before in this. The response was not slop, just very formal and verbose.
I use speed crunch almost every day mostly to see bits and bit shift operations visually. It's just strange to see requesting feature, getting an automated further inquiry, and then a response that yeah that sounds good to do.
weird-eye-issue 6 hours ago [-]
> I absolutely do not mind it being AI driven
Why do you think it was AI driven? It was more than likely human driven, but largely written by an AI to save time.
RexHuang 5 hours ago [-]
[flagged]
hypercube33 14 hours ago [-]
[dead]
tech_army 6 hours ago [-]
[dead]
amelius 14 hours ago [-]
I also recently made a fairly complete scientific calculator. I first asked Claude what functions it would put in it, then I made some modifications (added complex numbers), and told it to write the calculator. It looked perfect in one shot. This is really how simple this kind of thing has become.
girvo 14 hours ago [-]
Scientific calculators are surprisingly hard to get right. SpeedCrunch itself just fixed some calculation errors (usually its order of operations based, but not always). I’d be interested to see how accurate yours is, though I also wonder if there are lower level libraries to leverage to make it a moot point
After installing it, I was surprised to see that the immediate changes most noticeable to me were that the input box was unnecessarily doubled in size, enclosed in an unnecessary border, and surrounded by unnecessary dead space; and that there's now marked input lag that never existed in the original version.
I never had a single problem with 0.12 over the past ten years, and use it nearly every day -- no bugs, no missing features.
I appreciate the desire to improve and innovate, but you know, sometimes, software really is finished.
That's never the case for any consumer app, the potential for improvement in UI is practically infinite. But also, just use the old version if it's finished, you don't need to upgrade?
(this app has plenty of bugs / missing issues just like everything else, for example, blurry text on some platforms)
If that's true, how do you explain the observable pattern of many consumer applications degrading in UI functionality and coherence after a certain point?
> But also, just use the old version if it's finished, you don't need to upgrade?
Exactly. I reverted to 0.12.
Most consumer software in developed under the assumption that features only have a cost when being built. Their maintenance cost, and the combinatorial complexity each new feature adds, is barely considered. As a result, software teams add complexity at a speed that exceeds the rate at which the team's size, and the volume of work it can handle, grows. Eventually this reaches a critical threshold and the quality of the software starts to decline. But this doesn't mean the software couldn't still be improved, just that there isn't the resource available to do so.
Well, that's easy: Bad choices. The better something is, the easier it is to change it in a way, that makes it worse.
I agree with GP, everything can be improved, but that doesn't mean that you will succeed, or that you should try, for various, separate reasons.
I opened an issue while it was on bitbucket, but the response was something "yeah, that's intentional".
I see they bumped it to 14 digits now.
for years I've had a custom build of it with
src/math/hmath.cpp:
- if (expd > 5) + if (expd > 25)
blessed be the open source!
I used to use it quite a bit, but I now gravitate towards numbat instead [1].
[0]: https://www.speedcrunch.org/download.html
[1]: https://github.com/sharkdp/numbat
That should really be an error.
-4.9 is unequivocally correct.
https://antovsky.itch.io/naut
A calculator without source available? In this day and age?? Did I miss something? I searched, but no sign of a repo.
Looked cool, but not that cool.
SpeedCrunch - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29661485 - Dec 2021 (131 comments)
Speedcrunch (calculator) - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=460520 - Feb 2009 (2 comments)
I've been using it for years after struggling missing the windows 2000 calculator.
I absolutely do not mind it being AI driven. I have not seen this before in this. The response was not slop, just very formal and verbose.
I use speed crunch almost every day mostly to see bits and bit shift operations visually. It's just strange to see requesting feature, getting an automated further inquiry, and then a response that yeah that sounds good to do.
Why do you think it was AI driven? It was more than likely human driven, but largely written by an AI to save time.