commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From S├ębastien Brisard <>
Subject Re: [math] Exposing the Lanczos approximation in o.a.c.m3.special.Gamma?
Date Wed, 09 May 2012 10:11:42 GMT
Hi Thomas,

>> Hi,
>> the patch for the proposed modification has been attached to the
>> MATH-753 ticket. Thanks for your comments!
> What I have seen in the patch, you remove duplicated code by using the
> already existing lanczos function, and create an additional function for
> the constant.
In fact, I've realized that I have accidentally committed the
lanczos() function in r1334315, which has nothing to do with this
matter (that revision was about MATH-784). In fact, double
lanczos(double) is indeed new.
I will try to revert the change in Gamma in r1334315, and commit it in
a new revision, once we all agree that double lanczos(double) can be

So the question is: do you like this function lanczos (and its
Javadoc) or not. Do you agree with this method being public?

> I guess just creating a public final static constant for the LANCZOS_G
> value would be better?
Yes, you're right, it is better...

> Thomas

To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message