Yep, they both converge on tanh afaics. Your one is more efficient though, I'll use that. (attached)
But what I don't understand is why it needs scaling and doesn't naturally work over -1 to +1 cheers, Andy On Tue, 7 Oct 2008 14:46:56 +0200 Thomas Grill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi, > > > An approximation to tanh(x) is a continued fraction > > x/1+ (x^2)/3+ (4x^2)/5+ (16x^2)/9+ ... > > are you sure this is correct? > Another well-known formulation is x/(1+x^2/(3+x^2/(5+x^2/(7+..... > which works for me and converges quickly. > see http://nrich.maths.org/public/viewer.php?obj_id=1451 > > gr~~~ > -- Use the source
tanh-cfrac.pd
Description: Binary data
_______________________________________________ [email protected] mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
