#11888: Sage is missing the lambert_w function
----------------------------------------------------------------+-----------
Reporter: benjaminfjones |
Owner: burcin
Type: defect |
Status: needs_review
Priority: minor |
Milestone: sage-5.1
Component: symbolics |
Resolution:
Keywords: lambert_w symbolics conversion maxima sd35.5 | Work
issues:
Report Upstream: N/A |
Reviewers: Keshav Kini, Karl-Dieter Crisman, Fredrik Johansson, Burcin Erocal
Authors: Benjamin Jones | Merged
in:
Dependencies: |
Stopgaps:
----------------------------------------------------------------+-----------
Comment (by kcrisman):
I'm sure we can finish this off next week in Seattle. Meanwhile, an
interesting update from the Maxima developers about coming attractions:
{{{
Message: 4
Date: Thu, 17 May 2012 04:31:13 +0000 (UTC)
From: Robert Dodier <[email protected]>
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [Maxima] Generalized Lambert W function - premature
commit
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
On 2012-05-17, David Billinghurst <[email protected]> wrote:
> Oops. I have accidentally committed some code for Generalized Lambert
> W function to src/specfn.lisp. Still getting my head around git.
> The code seems functionally correct, and passes tests in
> tests/rtest_lambert_w.mac, but I hadn't finished polishing it and it
> is still undocumented. Unless anyone objects, I will leave it in
> place for the time being.
No problem, OK by me.
> There is a new function generalized_lambert_w(k,z) that returns the
> kth branch W_k(z). There are float and bigfloat routines for complex
> z. generalized_lambert_w(0,z) is not (yet) simplified to
> lambert_w(z), as I hadn't decided if this should be done
> unconditionally or controlled by a flag. Thoughts?
Is it more convenient to simplify W_0(z) instead of W(z) ? If not, then
it seems reasonable to just go ahead and simplify it.
If you decide against automatically simplifying W_0(z) to W(z), I guess
I hope you don't make it controlled by a flag; flags cause trouble,
because one can't guess by looking at some code how it's going to turn
out. How about a function to carry out the simplification.
}}}
--
Ticket URL: <http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/11888#comment:43>
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.
