Well adding pictures wouldn't be to hard in TI-BASIC, if I understand you correctly. All you'd have to do is create routines for drawing the shapes and then just use commands to call the correct one. Also, if you do the full solving thing like you showed (I believe you tried it before in a former release or something and I showed you a graphscreen based one) I would possibly stick with the graphscreen since it will look a lot neater. Or you could use the Output( command, would be the same as using Text( roughly. Using Disp would just make it to fast to see anything, I think anyways. You could get it to work if it was tweaked with correctly.

I would also say you might want to avoid Axe for something like this (unless a new version was released that fully supports floating point numbers). Since the numbers you get with this program, especially from using π, are mainly numbers with decimals which are a pain in Axe. Just my two cents though.

Good luck on any progress though.

Quote from: meishe91 on December 02, 2010, 01:55:59 am

Well adding pictures wouldn't be to hard in TI-BASIC, if I understand you correctly. All you'd have to do is create routines for drawing the shapes and then just use commands to call the correct one. Also, if you do the full solving thing like you showed (I believe you tried it before in a former release or something and I showed you a graphscreen based one) I would possibly stick with the graphscreen since it will look a lot neater. Or you could use the Output( command, would be the same as using Text( roughly. Using Disp would just make it to fast to see anything, I think anyways. You could get it to work if it was tweaked with correctly.

I would also say you might want to avoid Axe for something like this (unless a new version was released that fully supports floating point numbers). Since the numbers you get with this program, especially from using π, are mainly numbers with decimals which are a pain in Axe. Just my two cents though.

Good luck on any progress though.

Yes, I really hope Axe includes pi in the next version and some more math functions. I heard it was to avoid that it gets slow, but I don't really think it would be such a memory consumption.

Now, I have managed to make that after you calculate a formula, you go back to the menu (Labels easy stuff).

Now, the next step is another page and adding triangle solver

you can do many digits of pi if you use 31415  then divide it by 10000 at the end of the equation for more precise answers.

Quote from: ScoutDavid on December 02, 2010, 04:07:18 pm

Quote from: meishe91 on December 02, 2010, 01:55:59 am

Well adding pictures wouldn't be to hard in TI-BASIC, if I understand you correctly. All you'd have to do is create routines for drawing the shapes and then just use commands to call the correct one. Also, if you do the full solving thing like you showed (I believe you tried it before in a former release or something and I showed you a graphscreen based one) I would possibly stick with the graphscreen since it will look a lot neater. Or you could use the Output( command, would be the same as using Text( roughly. Using Disp would just make it to fast to see anything, I think anyways. You could get it to work if it was tweaked with correctly.

I would also say you might want to avoid Axe for something like this (unless a new version was released that fully supports floating point numbers). Since the numbers you get with this program, especially from using π, are mainly numbers with decimals which are a pain in Axe. Just my two cents though.

Good luck on any progress though.

Yes, I really hope Axe includes pi in the next version and some more math functions. I heard it was to avoid that it gets slow, but I don't really think it would be such a memory consumption.

Now, I have managed to make that after you calculate a formula, you go back to the menu (Labels easy stuff).

Now, the next step is another page and adding triangle solver

you can do many digits of pi if you use 31415  then divide it by 10000 at the end of the equation for more precise answers.

I'm sorry nemo, but this is a great idea! Getting the original value of pi, by making it ourselves!

you could deal with 4 byte numbers by yourself with L1+0 through L1+3 etc.

Quote from: meishe91 on December 02, 2010, 01:55:59 am

Well adding pictures wouldn't be to hard in TI-BASIC, if I understand you correctly. All you'd have to do is create routines for drawing the shapes and then just use commands to call the correct one. Also, if you do the full solving thing like you showed (I believe you tried it before in a former release or something and I showed you a graphscreen based one) I would possibly stick with the graphscreen since it will look a lot neater. Or you could use the Output( command, would be the same as using Text( roughly. Using Disp would just make it to fast to see anything, I think anyways. You could get it to work if it was tweaked with correctly.

I would also say you might want to avoid Axe for something like this (unless a new version was released that fully supports floating point numbers). Since the numbers you get with this program, especially from using ?, are mainly numbers with decimals which are a pain in Axe. Just my two cents though.

Good luck on any progress though.

Yes, I really hope Axe includes pi in the next version and some more math functions. I heard it was to avoid that it gets slow, but I don't really think it would be such a memory consumption.

Now, I have managed to make that after you calculate a formula, you go back to the menu (Labels easy stuff).

Now, the next step is another page and adding triangle solver

It's not so much memory consuming as it is speed consuming. Floating point numbers are a big slowdown since they are a routine by themselves, I believe.

Quote from: nemo on December 02, 2010, 04:09:38 pm

axe was made for games, so i highly doubt floating point will be added. and for things like raycasters which provide precision math, Runer has made slow but accurate sin/cos routines for pre-generated tables.

Would fixed points be enough for a raycaster?

Seems to be fast enough for Squidgetx

Quote from: nemo on December 02, 2010, 04:09:38 pm

axe was made for games, so i highly doubt floating point will be added. and for things like raycasters which provide precision math, Runer has made slow but accurate sin/cos routines for pre-generated tables.

Would fixed points be enough for a raycaster?

I don't know, but squidget made a very good one. Runner followed him with another great one!

Quote from: DJ Omnimaga on December 03, 2010, 12:55:11 am

Quote from: nemo on December 02, 2010, 04:09:38 pm

axe was made for games, so i highly doubt floating point will be added. and for things like raycasters which provide precision math, Runer has made slow but accurate sin/cos routines for pre-generated tables.

Would fixed points be enough for a raycaster?

I don't know, but squidget made a very good one. Runner followed him with another great one!

Well all roughly the same code as Squidget's, Runner just did a few optimizations and added a Assembly routine (I believe that's what it is unless Runner released a different one that I missed). But ya, they are really nice.