#5415: wrong definition of multifactorial?
------------------------------+---------------------------------------------
Reporter: cwitty | Owner: robertwb
Type: defect | Status: new
Priority: major | Milestone: sage-4.1.2
Component: basic arithmetic | Keywords:
Reviewer: | Author:
Merged: |
------------------------------+---------------------------------------------
Changes (by kcrisman):
* cc: robertwb (added)
Comment:
Or an even more careful look reveals that Sloane starts at n=0 - my bad.
So there is an inconsistency in the definitions. Sloane's sequences agree
with jhpalmieri, while Sage agrees with Wikipedia.
I'm ccing: the author of multifactorial in Sage, who will hopefully weigh
in on what definition is okay.
--
Ticket URL: <http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/5415#comment:4>
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 post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/sage-trac?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
