#16813: symbolic Legendre / associated Legendre functions / polynomials
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Reporter: rws | Owner:
Type: enhancement | Status: new
Priority: major | Milestone: sage-6.4
Component: symbolics | Resolution:
Keywords: | Merged in:
Authors: | Reviewers:
Report Upstream: N/A | Work issues:
Branch: | Commit:
u/rws/symbolic_legendre___associated_legendre_functions___polynomials|
0f86b77a9aa818add6848cacf9a3f371d49c7d3a
Dependencies: | Stopgaps:
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Comment (by maldun):
Thanks for resolving this issue! I suppose I wasn't careful enough with
complex arguments. But in my defense: I hadn't time to test this codes
well enough when I wrote them ... but hopefully they give some useful
informations.
concerning complex conjugation: I hope my answer on the mailing list give
some clues: [https://groups.google.com/forum/?hl=en#!topic/sage-
support/bEMPMEYeZKU]
Replying to [comment:15 rws]:
> OK, I resolved it by using `conjugate()` on every logarithm in the
`Q(n,x)` algorithms (on which the `Q(n,m,x)` recurrence is based, too).
>
> Update: it however makes symbolic work tedious and differentiation
impossible, at the moment.
>
> See also https://groups.google.com/forum/?hl=en#!topic/sage-
support/bEMPMEYeZKU on derivatives of conjugates in Sage.
--
Ticket URL: <http://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/16813#comment:16>
Sage <http://www.sagemath.org>
Sage: Creating a Viable Open Source Alternative to Magma, Maple, Mathematica,
and MATLAB
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"sage-trac" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-trac.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
