Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.3 4.3bsd-beta 6/6/85; site ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!ucbvax!brahms!weemba
From: weemba@brahms.BERKELEY.EDU (Matthew P. Wiener)
Newsgroups: net.lang.c,net.arch
Subject: Re: Integer division
Message-ID: <11612@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU>
Date: Thu, 30-Jan-86 02:54:16 EST
Article-I.D.: ucbvax.11612
Posted: Thu Jan 30 02:54:16 1986
Date-Received: Sat, 1-Feb-86 03:09:09 EST
References: <332@ism780c.UUCP> <11603@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU> <11610@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU>
Sender: usenet@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU
Reply-To: weemba@brahms.UUCP (Matthew P. Wiener)
Distribution: net
Organization: University of California, Berkeley
Lines: 14
Xref: watmath net.lang.c:7709 net.arch:2442

>>[Whether CS people should even be *allowed* to make such mathematical
>>decisions is another question.  In C on UNIX, for example, one has
>
>bill. When mathematicians define functions in a certain way, it is almost
>always for good reasons. I can think of only a few cases where doing 
>things differently might be advisable (e.g., 1/Gammma(x) or 1/Gamma(x+1)
>instead of Gamma(x) never needs to worry about the poles so might be
>better on a computer, even though for theoretical perposes Gamma(x) is
>fine). Unless you really understand the situation, don't mess with the

Speaking of the gamma function, why (in C on UNIX) is it CALLED gamma()
when it RETURNS log(gamma())?  Sheeesh.

ucbvax!brahms!weemba	Matthew P Wiener/UCB Math Dept/Berkeley CA 94720