From: Daniel J Sebald <daniel.sebald@ie...> - 2006-09-27 16:37:17
Chris Monson wrote:
> Reading the posts again, it would appear that this means that sgngam is
> broken on my system, but that everything else (gamma-related, anyway) is
> working correctly. Am I reading that right?
Thanks... Not sure; could be but maybe not. The reason is that
y = GAMMA(real(pop(&a)));
push(Gcomplex(&a, signgam * gp_exp(y), 0.0));
doesn't make any sense anymore if GAMMA is "true" gamma rather than log gamma. I guess it doesn't pay to understand what it is beyond the fact we know gamma() = tgamma() on your system.
I'd say this needs to be addressed before 4.2 release.