This is the mail archive of the gsl-discuss@sources.redhat.com mailing list for the GSL project.
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |
Other format: | [Raw text] |
Jason Hooper Stover writes: > gsl_sf_gamma_inc_Q (185.0, 200.0) gives the value 0.13594954199834325, > whereas a gp script gives 0.13594954213327904. The disparity > between gsl and gp grows as the second argument increases. (I guess > gp could be wrong, Hmmm... GSL-1.4 produces the correct answer to full double-precision accuracy for gsl_sf_gamma_inc_Q(185,200) (for integer "a" this can be verified analytically). The gp front-end prints too many digits by default: $ gp ? incgam(185,200)/gamma(185) %1 = 0.1359495421332790409768941685 ? default(realprecision,300) ? incgam(185,200)/gamma(185) %2 = 0.13594954199834326027261113221577..... > but since it has almost-arbitrary precision, I figured > it's correct.) I can't believe you said that ;-) -- Brian Gough
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |