Re: [pure-lang-users] complex 0

[Albert G. <Dr....@t-...>]

Eddie Rucker wrote:
> I got this wrong then. Apologies to Albert.

There's no reason to apologize, and there's no easy right or wrong in 
these questions, that's what makes them so difficult. Of course we don't 
want to violate mathematical truths (and even that's not guaranteed with 
floating point numbers!), but apart from that there's still a lot of 
leeway in which formulas and algebraic identities we're going to use.

The acclaimed but essentially vacuous "principle of the least surprise" 
may yield different results here, depending on whether you look at it 
from the pov of functional analysis, numerics, or just plain software 
engineering.

That's why I try to stick to established standards, but even ISO/IEC9899 
says that they're not sure about their "informational" design decisions 
in that area either, that's why they tagged them that way. I can 
understand that, I think that I'm a reasonably well-educated 
mathematician, but I'm not sure about the right way to implement these 
things either. :)

For the time being, I'll try to follow the ISO/IEC9899 recommendations, 
so if you notice anything which is at odds with these, please let me know!

Cheers,
Albert

-- 
Dr. Albert Gr"af
Dept. of Music-Informatics, University of Mainz, Germany
Email:  Dr....@t-..., ag...@mu...
WWW:    http://www.musikinformatik.uni-mainz.de/ag