Can I simply remove all and's in While and If statements because of Boolean logic?
Don't ask any questions – do your own experiments and trust the data, and not the forum. If you take someone else's word for the way something works, then you're skipping over the logic that would give you an informed decision about it. More than half of the statements made about TI-Basic in this wiki's message board have been questionable or false.
Are you saying my attempt to get confirmation of things I'm thinking is wrong because of the reliance on something other than my own thoughts and observations, or because of the fact that the information others present tend to be wrong? Or both? Or is it just annoying?
More B than A. I'm just pleased that there is someone who doesn't feel the need to believe himself to be right without any attempts to verify it.
Perhaps it is my linguistic incompetence, but I did not understand that last sentence. I've decided that that means I'm intellectually lazy, but hey, at least I don't have that European mind-set!
Oh, and by the way, I did experiment with it and found that what I suspected was right. It was really interesting taking what I learned messing around and comparing it to what the people on this forum said, and had I experimented first, I wouldn't have gotten that contrast, nor would I have found either as interesting. If there's a problem with me conducting myself like that, I'll stop, but I think it was more beneficial to me to do it like that.
The long and short of it is that one should spend time "playing" with the calculator as much as (and maybe even more than) reading stuff here, and not to just take some "stranger on the Internet"'s word for it. :) Besides, yours is the very sort of question amenable to experimentation.
What I said was, "Thank you for not being like other members we have had in the past who will automatically assert something without bothering to check if it's valid first." You came here and asked a question, which exposes you to the opportunity of finding out that you were wrong. This is a good thing. If one ever prides himself in knowing something that may not be true, there's no chance of convincing him of otherwise.
The warning I gave was to bring to light the fact that there are hardly any experts here, and that other posters have been too shortsighted to even test their own writing. This not only misguides the end user, but it creates problems for those who then have to pick up the pieces and correct their mistakes afterward. Basically, I had wanted to plant a seed of doubt so that you wouldn't misjudge the level of expertise of whomever might have gotten to you first.
As you rise in skill, it will become easier to distinguish between the programmer and the wannabe: the amateur will be inclined to favor the user's comfort level over the quality of his/her programming, and this often results in people standing in a circle around a pile of horrible code and yet overly pleased with themselves at how great of a job they all think they did. This is devastating to those who instead prefer to give their answers for the sake of the language itself.
Ultimately, this is where people who are less concerned about accuracy than "niceness" will tend to be ticked off. The truth is that for some people, it's a legitimate discipline of art, and those who are proficient in it want to refine it and take it to the next level without the savages beneath them perpetually lowering the standards for everyone else. Medical doctors don't like to see patients being treated by quacks, and programmers don't like to see newbies being given code that doesn't work.
So when I say that you should doubt, you should not merely doubt for doubting's sake; instead, use it as a tool to detect when there might be something different from what someone else says. Set up experiments, look at the results, and speak honest truths about it. Remember that an unwavering belief is still just a belief, and that opinions are reckless: neither of these are conducive to end results. I cannot stress this enough: it is what continues to exist despite your want of it that is factual, and it is not through your want alone that it became so.
Ah, then thank you. Forgive me if I seemed presumptuous, or a tad stand-offish; I merely was not sure of your character. I understand now what you were attempting to purvey. Thank you for the advice; deeming it good, I'll keep it in mind as I continue to learn and advance as a programmer.
P.S. (via Edit): Your poetic language threw me off at first.
No, not always. For example, if you were using a statement like
:If K=25 and V>1
it cannot be replaced with
since both would check for the wrong value.
would work, but I don't see why you would spend an extra byte just to get rid of the and .
I have found a very useful application for getting rid of the and :
:If K≠0 and I≠3.141592654
can be simplified to
which saves three bytes.