Re: HMS+ / HMS implementation Message #4 Posted by Karl Schneider on 12 Feb 2008, 12:58 a.m., in response to message #3 by Alex L
Alex 
Our initial findings still stand: The HP28C/S, HP42S, and HP49G get the result  4.56 exactly  correct in all decimal digits. I don't know whether that is due to internal "RND"style closetolerance rounding with subsequent MOD(x,60), or whether the input arguments are parsed for separate processing in the calculations.
FWIW, here is a table of "incorrect" calculations and conversions:
10000.20 10000.20
ENTER >H or >HR
9995.24 9995.24
HMS >H or >HR

>HMS
model result method
HP41 4.555998800 HMS
HP15C 4.555998800 >H >H  >HMS
HP32S* 4.55599998800 >HR >HR  >HMS
HP48G 4.55599999999 HMS
* (includes HP32SII, HP33s, and HP35s)
(Thanks, George and John. I would expect the HP49g+ and HP50g to yield the same result as the HP49G. I would not take it for granted that the HP35s would always yield the same result as the HP33s. Some of the HP33s' datahandling methods from the HP32SII were replaced with RPLstyle methods in the HP35s.)
 KS
Edited: 14 Feb 2008, 1:48 a.m. after one or more responses were posted
