Martin Maechler <maechler <at> stat.math.ethz.ch> writes: > >> But lgamma(x) is log(abs(gamma(x))), so it looks okay to me. > >> > >> Duncan Murdoch > > TH> Oops, yes! That's what comes of talking off the top of my head > TH> (I don't think I've ever had occasion to evaluate lgamma(x) > TH> for negative x, so never consciously checked in ?lgamma). > > TH> Thanks, Duncan! > > Indeed.... as we all know, a picture can be worth a thousand words, > and a simple R call such as > plot(lgamma, -7, 0, n=1000) > would have saved many words, and notably spared us from > yet-another erroneous non-bug report. > > Martin
In Kjetil's defense, he didn't submit an actual bug report -- and although his subject line does contain the word "bug", I read his "bug report" as asking a question. People are allowed to make mistakes ... While I was reading ?lgamma I noticed that the "See Also" section refers to gammaCody(), which is now defunct. Perhaps remove the sentence? Ben Bolker ______________________________________________ R-devel@r-project.org mailing list https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
