[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MATH-164?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#action_12494617
]
Phil Steitz commented on MATH-164:
----------------------------------
I agree with Richard here and will add a little historical context. Initially,
we planned to fully implement C99x. In addition to the fact that the spec
itself was neither final nor freely available when [math] 1.1 was released (I
had to get special permission to even quote from it in the javadoc), it is a C
spec and very difficult if not impossible to fully implement and document in
Java with decent performance. We opted to take the approach of trying to stay
as close as possible to the spec while not abusing Java semantics or killing
performance, documenting carefully what we did for each operation. The javadoc
for multiply is a good example. The example above could be added as an
additional example illustrating what the formula yields.
We are open to suggestions for improvement. Probably best to discuss on
commons-dev.
> Complex - Issue with non-compliance to C99!
> -------------------------------------------
>
> Key: MATH-164
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MATH-164
> Project: Commons Math
> Issue Type: Wish
> Affects Versions: 1.1
> Reporter: Richard Lyon
> Priority: Minor
>
> Complex z1, z2, z3;
>
> // assign values to the two complex numbers
> z1 = new Complex(1.0, 0.0);
> z2 = new Complex(Double.POSITIVE_INFINITY, Double.POSITIVE_INFINITY);
>
> // multiply the two complex numbers
> z3 = z1.multiply(z2);
> The result is that both the real and imaginary part of z3 are NaN. Isn't it
> somewhat desirable that both parts of the complex should be Infinity?
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
