From: SourceForge.net <no...@so...> - 2011-07-28 19:31:39
|
Bugs item #3381301, was opened at 2011-07-28 21:31 Message generated for change (Tracker Item Submitted) made by crategus You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=3381301&group_id=4933 Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the comment thread, including the initial issue submission, for this request, not just the latest update. Category: Lisp Core - Floating point Group: None Status: Open Resolution: None Priority: 1 Private: No Submitted By: Dieter Kaiser (crategus) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: log(-1.0b0) has small realpart Initial Comment: The result of log(-1.0b0) has a small realpart within the numerical precision. To be more consistent with log(1.0b0) ->0.0b0 I think the small realpart should be omitted. Maxima version: 5.24post Maxima build date: 20:27 7/28/2011 Host type: i686-pc-linux-gnu Lisp implementation type: SBCL Lisp implementation version: 1.0.45 (%i2) log(-1.0b0); (%o2) 3.141592653589793b0*%i-1.084202172485504b-19 Dieter Kaiser ---------------------------------------------------------------------- You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=3381301&group_id=4933 |
From: SourceForge.net <no...@so...> - 2011-07-29 02:38:05
|
Bugs item #3381301, was opened at 2011-07-28 14:31 Message generated for change (Comment added) made by willisbl You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=3381301&group_id=4933 Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the comment thread, including the initial issue submission, for this request, not just the latest update. Category: Lisp Core - Floating point Group: None Status: Open Resolution: None Priority: 1 Private: No Submitted By: Dieter Kaiser (crategus) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: log(-1.0b0) has small realpart Initial Comment: The result of log(-1.0b0) has a small realpart within the numerical precision. To be more consistent with log(1.0b0) ->0.0b0 I think the small realpart should be omitted. Maxima version: 5.24post Maxima build date: 20:27 7/28/2011 Host type: i686-pc-linux-gnu Lisp implementation type: SBCL Lisp implementation version: 1.0.45 (%i2) log(-1.0b0); (%o2) 3.141592653589793b0*%i-1.084202172485504b-19 Dieter Kaiser ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >Comment By: Barton Willis (willisbl) Date: 2011-07-28 21:38 Message: The bigfloat package handles this better: MAXIMA> (bigfloat::log (bigfloat::to (maxima::meval '$x))) +0.0b0+3.141592653589793b0*%i Would it be possible to use the bigfloat package in simpln? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=3381301&group_id=4933 |
From: SourceForge.net <no...@so...> - 2011-07-29 03:39:49
|
Bugs item #3381301, was opened at 2011-07-28 14:31 Message generated for change (Comment added) made by willisbl You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=3381301&group_id=4933 Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the comment thread, including the initial issue submission, for this request, not just the latest update. Category: Lisp Core - Floating point Group: None Status: Open Resolution: None Priority: 1 Private: No Submitted By: Dieter Kaiser (crategus) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: log(-1.0b0) has small realpart Initial Comment: The result of log(-1.0b0) has a small realpart within the numerical precision. To be more consistent with log(1.0b0) ->0.0b0 I think the small realpart should be omitted. Maxima version: 5.24post Maxima build date: 20:27 7/28/2011 Host type: i686-pc-linux-gnu Lisp implementation type: SBCL Lisp implementation version: 1.0.45 (%i2) log(-1.0b0); (%o2) 3.141592653589793b0*%i-1.084202172485504b-19 Dieter Kaiser ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >Comment By: Barton Willis (willisbl) Date: 2011-07-28 22:39 Message: rest_log #11 is a known failure: Running tests in rtest_log: ********************** Problem 11 *************** Input: log(- 1.0b0) - bfloat(%i %pi) Inserting ((or (complex-number-p y #'(lambda(s) (or (floatp s) ($bfloatp s)))) (and $numer (complex-number-p y #'mnump))) (maxima::to (bigfloat::log (bigfloat::to y)))) into simpln fixes this bug, and it changes some expected results. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Barton Willis (willisbl) Date: 2011-07-28 21:38 Message: The bigfloat package handles this better: MAXIMA> (bigfloat::log (bigfloat::to (maxima::meval '$x))) +0.0b0+3.141592653589793b0*%i Would it be possible to use the bigfloat package in simpln? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=3381301&group_id=4933 |
From: SourceForge.net <no...@so...> - 2011-07-29 10:14:34
|
Bugs item #3381301, was opened at 2011-07-28 14:31 Message generated for change (Comment added) made by willisbl You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=3381301&group_id=4933 Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the comment thread, including the initial issue submission, for this request, not just the latest update. Category: Lisp Core - Floating point Group: None Status: Open Resolution: None Priority: 1 Private: No Submitted By: Dieter Kaiser (crategus) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: log(-1.0b0) has small realpart Initial Comment: The result of log(-1.0b0) has a small realpart within the numerical precision. To be more consistent with log(1.0b0) ->0.0b0 I think the small realpart should be omitted. Maxima version: 5.24post Maxima build date: 20:27 7/28/2011 Host type: i686-pc-linux-gnu Lisp implementation type: SBCL Lisp implementation version: 1.0.45 (%i2) log(-1.0b0); (%o2) 3.141592653589793b0*%i-1.084202172485504b-19 Dieter Kaiser ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >Comment By: Barton Willis (willisbl) Date: 2011-07-29 05:14 Message: Correction: ((and (complex-number-p y #'mnump) (or $numer (not (complex-number-p y #'$ratnump)))) (maxima::to (bigfloat::log (bigfloat::to y)))) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Barton Willis (willisbl) Date: 2011-07-28 22:39 Message: rest_log #11 is a known failure: Running tests in rtest_log: ********************** Problem 11 *************** Input: log(- 1.0b0) - bfloat(%i %pi) Inserting ((or (complex-number-p y #'(lambda(s) (or (floatp s) ($bfloatp s)))) (and $numer (complex-number-p y #'mnump))) (maxima::to (bigfloat::log (bigfloat::to y)))) into simpln fixes this bug, and it changes some expected results. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Barton Willis (willisbl) Date: 2011-07-28 21:38 Message: The bigfloat package handles this better: MAXIMA> (bigfloat::log (bigfloat::to (maxima::meval '$x))) +0.0b0+3.141592653589793b0*%i Would it be possible to use the bigfloat package in simpln? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=3381301&group_id=4933 |
From: SourceForge.net <no...@so...> - 2011-07-29 11:08:27
|
Bugs item #3381301, was opened at 2011-07-28 21:31 Message generated for change (Comment added) made by crategus You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=3381301&group_id=4933 Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the comment thread, including the initial issue submission, for this request, not just the latest update. Category: Lisp Core - Floating point Group: None Status: Open Resolution: None Priority: 1 Private: No Submitted By: Dieter Kaiser (crategus) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: log(-1.0b0) has small realpart Initial Comment: The result of log(-1.0b0) has a small realpart within the numerical precision. To be more consistent with log(1.0b0) ->0.0b0 I think the small realpart should be omitted. Maxima version: 5.24post Maxima build date: 20:27 7/28/2011 Host type: i686-pc-linux-gnu Lisp implementation type: SBCL Lisp implementation version: 1.0.45 (%i2) log(-1.0b0); (%o2) 3.141592653589793b0*%i-1.084202172485504b-19 Dieter Kaiser ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >Comment By: Dieter Kaiser (crategus) Date: 2011-07-29 13:08 Message: With the proposed change I get the desired result for log(-1.0b0) -> 3.141592653589793b0 %i. With SBCL I get three changes in the testsuite. I have not looked at the examples in detail, but it seems to me that failures are due to a slightly loss of accuracy in the numerical calculation of special functions. Perhaps the results have changed only within the predictable accuracy. Because we have no checks in the testsite for the numerical precision of the log function, it might be difficult to say if there is a small problem in the bigfloat package. At the end, it would be nice if we can implement one scheme of numerical evaluation, or if both available schemes give equivalent results. These are the changed results: Running tests in rtest15: ********************** Problem 233 *************** Input: ev(Y1, numer) Result: [.1601071267287311, .3182173976481846, .6792822087245607, - .2554475201086612, .4550000458216386, 1.513096652187913, 1.631906796078438, 1.153564994895108, - 1.9459101, .9354375628925464, 6.548062940247827, 1.427448757889531 %i, .1438410362258904 - 1.570796326794897 %i, 2.644120761058629, 2.633915793849634, .1423756431678044, .1438410362258905, 1.010221447322645, 7.047554385466547, 6.976247043798604, .9898819735517056, .1433435475724631, .1418931937669325, .3779644730092272, 1.427448757889531, 1.428899272190733, 1.570796326794897 - 2.633915793849634 %i, 2.633915793849634 %i, .1433475689053653, .1418970546041639, .9898132604466151, 6.952316038379696, 7.023866335396166, 1.010291577169605, .1423717297922636, .1438369594361909, .1541506798272584, .1483117974987926, .1455231696984896, - 7.363980242224349, 50.3574714369117, - 687.6815220686585] This differed from the expected result: [0.16010712672873, 0.31821739764818, 0.67928220872456, - 0.25544752010866, 0.45500004582164, 1.513096652187913, 1.631906796078438, 1.153564994895108, - 1.945910149055313, 0.93543756289255, 6.548062940247834, 1.427448757889531 %i, 0.14384103622589 - 1.570796326794897 %i, 2.644120761058629, 2.633915793849633, 0.1423756431678, 0.14384103622589, 1.010221447322645, 7.047554385466551, 6.976247043798608, 0.98988197355171, 0.14334354757246, 0.14189319376693, 0.37796447300923, 1.427448757889531, 1.428899272190733, 1.570796326794897 - 2.633915793849634 %i, 2.633915793849634 %i, 0.14334756890537, 0.14189705460416, 0.98981326044662, 6.952316038379697, 7.023866335396166, 1.010291577169605, 0.14237172979226, 0.14383695943619, 0.15415067982726, 0.14831179749879, 0.14552316969849, - 7.363980242224349, 50.3574714369117, - 687.6815220686585] 251/252 tests passed The following 1 problem failed: (233) Running tests in rtest_gamma: ********************** Problem 654 *************** Input: 1 beta_incomplete(1.0b0, 2, -) 2 Result: 3.750000000000002b-1 This differed from the expected result: 3.75b-1 702/703 tests passed (not counting 2 expected errors) The following 1 problem failed: (654) Running tests in rtest_expintegral: ********************** Problem 66 *************** Input: ev(test_value(%, expintegral_e(3, 0.5), 15), numer) Result: 1.190408882578708e-10 and 5.463923757886846e-9 This differed from the expected result: true 184/185 tests passed The following 1 problem failed: (66) Dieter Kaiser ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Barton Willis (willisbl) Date: 2011-07-29 12:14 Message: Correction: ((and (complex-number-p y #'mnump) (or $numer (not (complex-number-p y #'$ratnump)))) (maxima::to (bigfloat::log (bigfloat::to y)))) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Barton Willis (willisbl) Date: 2011-07-29 05:39 Message: rest_log #11 is a known failure: Running tests in rtest_log: ********************** Problem 11 *************** Input: log(- 1.0b0) - bfloat(%i %pi) Inserting ((or (complex-number-p y #'(lambda(s) (or (floatp s) ($bfloatp s)))) (and $numer (complex-number-p y #'mnump))) (maxima::to (bigfloat::log (bigfloat::to y)))) into simpln fixes this bug, and it changes some expected results. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Barton Willis (willisbl) Date: 2011-07-29 04:38 Message: The bigfloat package handles this better: MAXIMA> (bigfloat::log (bigfloat::to (maxima::meval '$x))) +0.0b0+3.141592653589793b0*%i Would it be possible to use the bigfloat package in simpln? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=3381301&group_id=4933 |
From: SourceForge.net <no...@so...> - 2011-07-29 12:53:26
|
Bugs item #3381301, was opened at 2011-07-28 14:31 Message generated for change (Comment added) made by willisbl You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=3381301&group_id=4933 Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the comment thread, including the initial issue submission, for this request, not just the latest update. Category: Lisp Core - Floating point Group: None Status: Open Resolution: None Priority: 1 Private: No Submitted By: Dieter Kaiser (crategus) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: log(-1.0b0) has small realpart Initial Comment: The result of log(-1.0b0) has a small realpart within the numerical precision. To be more consistent with log(1.0b0) ->0.0b0 I think the small realpart should be omitted. Maxima version: 5.24post Maxima build date: 20:27 7/28/2011 Host type: i686-pc-linux-gnu Lisp implementation type: SBCL Lisp implementation version: 1.0.45 (%i2) log(-1.0b0); (%o2) 3.141592653589793b0*%i-1.084202172485504b-19 Dieter Kaiser ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >Comment By: Barton Willis (willisbl) Date: 2011-07-29 07:53 Message: Using Clozure CL, I get the same three test failures. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Dieter Kaiser (crategus) Date: 2011-07-29 06:08 Message: With the proposed change I get the desired result for log(-1.0b0) -> 3.141592653589793b0 %i. With SBCL I get three changes in the testsuite. I have not looked at the examples in detail, but it seems to me that failures are due to a slightly loss of accuracy in the numerical calculation of special functions. Perhaps the results have changed only within the predictable accuracy. Because we have no checks in the testsite for the numerical precision of the log function, it might be difficult to say if there is a small problem in the bigfloat package. At the end, it would be nice if we can implement one scheme of numerical evaluation, or if both available schemes give equivalent results. These are the changed results: Running tests in rtest15: ********************** Problem 233 *************** Input: ev(Y1, numer) Result: [.1601071267287311, .3182173976481846, .6792822087245607, - .2554475201086612, .4550000458216386, 1.513096652187913, 1.631906796078438, 1.153564994895108, - 1.9459101, .9354375628925464, 6.548062940247827, 1.427448757889531 %i, .1438410362258904 - 1.570796326794897 %i, 2.644120761058629, 2.633915793849634, .1423756431678044, .1438410362258905, 1.010221447322645, 7.047554385466547, 6.976247043798604, .9898819735517056, .1433435475724631, .1418931937669325, .3779644730092272, 1.427448757889531, 1.428899272190733, 1.570796326794897 - 2.633915793849634 %i, 2.633915793849634 %i, .1433475689053653, .1418970546041639, .9898132604466151, 6.952316038379696, 7.023866335396166, 1.010291577169605, .1423717297922636, .1438369594361909, .1541506798272584, .1483117974987926, .1455231696984896, - 7.363980242224349, 50.3574714369117, - 687.6815220686585] This differed from the expected result: [0.16010712672873, 0.31821739764818, 0.67928220872456, - 0.25544752010866, 0.45500004582164, 1.513096652187913, 1.631906796078438, 1.153564994895108, - 1.945910149055313, 0.93543756289255, 6.548062940247834, 1.427448757889531 %i, 0.14384103622589 - 1.570796326794897 %i, 2.644120761058629, 2.633915793849633, 0.1423756431678, 0.14384103622589, 1.010221447322645, 7.047554385466551, 6.976247043798608, 0.98988197355171, 0.14334354757246, 0.14189319376693, 0.37796447300923, 1.427448757889531, 1.428899272190733, 1.570796326794897 - 2.633915793849634 %i, 2.633915793849634 %i, 0.14334756890537, 0.14189705460416, 0.98981326044662, 6.952316038379697, 7.023866335396166, 1.010291577169605, 0.14237172979226, 0.14383695943619, 0.15415067982726, 0.14831179749879, 0.14552316969849, - 7.363980242224349, 50.3574714369117, - 687.6815220686585] 251/252 tests passed The following 1 problem failed: (233) Running tests in rtest_gamma: ********************** Problem 654 *************** Input: 1 beta_incomplete(1.0b0, 2, -) 2 Result: 3.750000000000002b-1 This differed from the expected result: 3.75b-1 702/703 tests passed (not counting 2 expected errors) The following 1 problem failed: (654) Running tests in rtest_expintegral: ********************** Problem 66 *************** Input: ev(test_value(%, expintegral_e(3, 0.5), 15), numer) Result: 1.190408882578708e-10 and 5.463923757886846e-9 This differed from the expected result: true 184/185 tests passed The following 1 problem failed: (66) Dieter Kaiser ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Barton Willis (willisbl) Date: 2011-07-29 05:14 Message: Correction: ((and (complex-number-p y #'mnump) (or $numer (not (complex-number-p y #'$ratnump)))) (maxima::to (bigfloat::log (bigfloat::to y)))) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Barton Willis (willisbl) Date: 2011-07-28 22:39 Message: rest_log #11 is a known failure: Running tests in rtest_log: ********************** Problem 11 *************** Input: log(- 1.0b0) - bfloat(%i %pi) Inserting ((or (complex-number-p y #'(lambda(s) (or (floatp s) ($bfloatp s)))) (and $numer (complex-number-p y #'mnump))) (maxima::to (bigfloat::log (bigfloat::to y)))) into simpln fixes this bug, and it changes some expected results. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Barton Willis (willisbl) Date: 2011-07-28 21:38 Message: The bigfloat package handles this better: MAXIMA> (bigfloat::log (bigfloat::to (maxima::meval '$x))) +0.0b0+3.141592653589793b0*%i Would it be possible to use the bigfloat package in simpln? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=3381301&group_id=4933 |
From: SourceForge.net <no...@so...> - 2012-08-19 16:35:29
|
Bugs item #3381301, was opened at 2011-07-28 12:31 Message generated for change (Comment added) made by rtoy You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=3381301&group_id=4933 Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the comment thread, including the initial issue submission, for this request, not just the latest update. Category: Lisp Core - Floating point Group: None >Status: Closed >Resolution: Fixed Priority: 1 Private: No Submitted By: Dieter Kaiser (crategus) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: log(-1.0b0) has small realpart Initial Comment: The result of log(-1.0b0) has a small realpart within the numerical precision. To be more consistent with log(1.0b0) ->0.0b0 I think the small realpart should be omitted. Maxima version: 5.24post Maxima build date: 20:27 7/28/2011 Host type: i686-pc-linux-gnu Lisp implementation type: SBCL Lisp implementation version: 1.0.45 (%i2) log(-1.0b0); (%o2) 3.141592653589793b0*%i-1.084202172485504b-19 Dieter Kaiser ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >Comment By: Raymond Toy (rtoy) Date: 2012-08-19 09:35 Message: Fixed by adding a special case in big-float-log which had no special code to handle log(1b0). simpln handled the case of log(1), but nothing else. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Barton Willis (willisbl) Date: 2011-07-29 05:53 Message: Using Clozure CL, I get the same three test failures. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Dieter Kaiser (crategus) Date: 2011-07-29 04:08 Message: With the proposed change I get the desired result for log(-1.0b0) -> 3.141592653589793b0 %i. With SBCL I get three changes in the testsuite. I have not looked at the examples in detail, but it seems to me that failures are due to a slightly loss of accuracy in the numerical calculation of special functions. Perhaps the results have changed only within the predictable accuracy. Because we have no checks in the testsite for the numerical precision of the log function, it might be difficult to say if there is a small problem in the bigfloat package. At the end, it would be nice if we can implement one scheme of numerical evaluation, or if both available schemes give equivalent results. These are the changed results: Running tests in rtest15: ********************** Problem 233 *************** Input: ev(Y1, numer) Result: [.1601071267287311, .3182173976481846, .6792822087245607, - .2554475201086612, .4550000458216386, 1.513096652187913, 1.631906796078438, 1.153564994895108, - 1.9459101, .9354375628925464, 6.548062940247827, 1.427448757889531 %i, .1438410362258904 - 1.570796326794897 %i, 2.644120761058629, 2.633915793849634, .1423756431678044, .1438410362258905, 1.010221447322645, 7.047554385466547, 6.976247043798604, .9898819735517056, .1433435475724631, .1418931937669325, .3779644730092272, 1.427448757889531, 1.428899272190733, 1.570796326794897 - 2.633915793849634 %i, 2.633915793849634 %i, .1433475689053653, .1418970546041639, .9898132604466151, 6.952316038379696, 7.023866335396166, 1.010291577169605, .1423717297922636, .1438369594361909, .1541506798272584, .1483117974987926, .1455231696984896, - 7.363980242224349, 50.3574714369117, - 687.6815220686585] This differed from the expected result: [0.16010712672873, 0.31821739764818, 0.67928220872456, - 0.25544752010866, 0.45500004582164, 1.513096652187913, 1.631906796078438, 1.153564994895108, - 1.945910149055313, 0.93543756289255, 6.548062940247834, 1.427448757889531 %i, 0.14384103622589 - 1.570796326794897 %i, 2.644120761058629, 2.633915793849633, 0.1423756431678, 0.14384103622589, 1.010221447322645, 7.047554385466551, 6.976247043798608, 0.98988197355171, 0.14334354757246, 0.14189319376693, 0.37796447300923, 1.427448757889531, 1.428899272190733, 1.570796326794897 - 2.633915793849634 %i, 2.633915793849634 %i, 0.14334756890537, 0.14189705460416, 0.98981326044662, 6.952316038379697, 7.023866335396166, 1.010291577169605, 0.14237172979226, 0.14383695943619, 0.15415067982726, 0.14831179749879, 0.14552316969849, - 7.363980242224349, 50.3574714369117, - 687.6815220686585] 251/252 tests passed The following 1 problem failed: (233) Running tests in rtest_gamma: ********************** Problem 654 *************** Input: 1 beta_incomplete(1.0b0, 2, -) 2 Result: 3.750000000000002b-1 This differed from the expected result: 3.75b-1 702/703 tests passed (not counting 2 expected errors) The following 1 problem failed: (654) Running tests in rtest_expintegral: ********************** Problem 66 *************** Input: ev(test_value(%, expintegral_e(3, 0.5), 15), numer) Result: 1.190408882578708e-10 and 5.463923757886846e-9 This differed from the expected result: true 184/185 tests passed The following 1 problem failed: (66) Dieter Kaiser ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Barton Willis (willisbl) Date: 2011-07-29 03:14 Message: Correction: ((and (complex-number-p y #'mnump) (or $numer (not (complex-number-p y #'$ratnump)))) (maxima::to (bigfloat::log (bigfloat::to y)))) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Barton Willis (willisbl) Date: 2011-07-28 20:39 Message: rest_log #11 is a known failure: Running tests in rtest_log: ********************** Problem 11 *************** Input: log(- 1.0b0) - bfloat(%i %pi) Inserting ((or (complex-number-p y #'(lambda(s) (or (floatp s) ($bfloatp s)))) (and $numer (complex-number-p y #'mnump))) (maxima::to (bigfloat::log (bigfloat::to y)))) into simpln fixes this bug, and it changes some expected results. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Barton Willis (willisbl) Date: 2011-07-28 19:38 Message: The bigfloat package handles this better: MAXIMA> (bigfloat::log (bigfloat::to (maxima::meval '$x))) +0.0b0+3.141592653589793b0*%i Would it be possible to use the bigfloat package in simpln? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=3381301&group_id=4933 |