From rksh1 at cam.ac.uk  Tue Dec 15 12:06:26 2009
From: rksh1 at cam.ac.uk (Robin Hankin)
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2009 11:06:26 +0000
Subject: [Rd] RFC: lchoose() vs lfactorial() etc
In-Reply-To: <4B275FDE.7090409@mx.uni-saarland.de>
References: <19239.19864.396771.484772@lynne.math.ethz.ch>
	<4B2754F8.9010701@cam.ac.uk> <4B275FDE.7090409@mx.uni-saarland.de>
Message-ID: <4B276DB2.9020509@cam.ac.uk>


Martin Becker wrote:
> Robin Hankin wrote:
>> ...
>> Is this the place to discuss having complex
>> arguments for gamma()?
>> ...
> If this discussion starts I would second the wish for the 
> functionality of gsl's lngamma_complex in base R.
>
>

Do you mean gsl or GSL? ;-)

[the GNU scientific library is 'GSL'; the R package is 'gsl']

There are a few functions in gsl that don't take  complex  arguments,
such as airy_Ai() and airy_Bi(),  but for me the top priority would
be the incomplete gamma function.

best wishes

rksh





-- 
Robin K. S. Hankin
Uncertainty Analyst
University of Cambridge
19 Silver Street
Cambridge CB3 9EP
01223-764877



[Rd] RFC: lchoose() vs lfactorial() etc
Robin Hankin