#17123: Extending binomial(n,k) to negative integers n, k.
---------------------------------+------------------------
Reporter: pluschny | Owner:
Type: enhancement | Status: new
Priority: minor | Milestone: sage-6.4
Component: combinatorics | Resolution:
Keywords: binomial | Merged in:
Authors: | Reviewers:
Report Upstream: N/A | Work issues:
Branch: | Commit:
Dependencies: | Stopgaps:
---------------------------------+------------------------
Comment (by darij):
Please do not change the current version. No, Peter, your convention is
not standard in any way. Read anything by Knuth and you will see that
{{{binomial(n, k) == 0}}} for negative k (no matter what n is) is
standard, and this happens to be the current behavior (I don't know why
people are saying that it is currently undefined). Having {{{binomial(z,
z) != 1}}} is collateral damage, but there is no way that could be fixed
reasonably.
Feel free to add {{{binomial_symmetrized}}} or whatever else you want to
call your function, however!
--
Ticket URL: <http://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/17123#comment:13>
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.
