[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

*To*: cl-cleanup@sail.stanford.edu*Subject*: New issue: COMPLEX-ATAN-BRANCH-CUT*From*: Guy Steele <gls@Think.COM>*Date*: Tue, 13 Dec 88 14:27:20 EST

Forum: Cleanup Issue: COMPLEX-ATAN-BRANCH-CUT References: CLtL p.208, 212 Related issues: IEEE-ATAN-BRANCH-CUT Category: CHANGE Edit history: Version 1, 13-Dec-88, Steele Problem description: The formula that defines ATAN results in a branch cut that is at variance with the recommendations of Prof. W. Kahan and with the implementations of that function in many computing systems and calculators. Proposal (COMPLEX-ATAN-BRANCH-CUT:TWEAK): Replace the formula arctan z = - i log ((1+iz) sqrt (1/(1+zâ??2))) with the formula arctan z = (log (1+iz) - log (1-iz)) / (2i) This leaves the branch cuts pretty much in place; the only change is that the upper branch cut (on the positive imaginary axis above i) is continuous with quadrant I, where the old formula has it continuous with quadrant II. Examples: (atan #c(0 2)) => #c(-1.57... 0.549...) ;Current (atan #c(0 2)) => #c(1.57... -0.549...) ;Proposed Note: 1.57... = pi/2, and 0.549... = (log 3)/2. Rationale: Compatibility with what seems to be becoming standard practice. Current practice: (atan #c(0 2)) => #c(-1.57... 0.549...) ;Symbolics CL (atan #c(0 2)) => #c(-1.57... 0.549...) ;Allegro CL 1.1 (Macintosh) (atan #c(0 2)) => #c(-1.57... 0.549...) ;Sun-4 CL 2.1.3 of 10-Nov-88 (atan #c(0 2)) => #c(1.57... -0.549...) ;Sun CL 2.0.3 of 30-Jun-87 (atan #c(0 2)) => #c(1.57... 0.549...) ;KCL of 3-Jun-87 Note that in KCL the upper branch cut is thus continuous with quadrant I, but its lower branch cut is continuous with quadrant III! Cost to Implementors: ATAN must be rewritten. It is not a very difficult fix. Cost to Users: It is barely conceivable that some user code could depend on this. Note that the proposed change invalidates the identities arctan i z = i arctanh z and arctanh i z = i arctan z on the upper branch cut. The compatibility note on p. 210 of CLtL gave users fair warning that a change of this kind might be adopted. Cost of non-adoption: Incompatibility with HP calculators. Benefits: Numerical analystsmay find the new definition easier to use. Esthetics: A toss-up, except to those who care. Discussion: Steele has sent a letter to W. Kahan at Berkeley to get any last comments he may have on the matter. Paul Penfield of MIT, after whose article the Common Lisp branch cuts were originally patterned, endorses this change.

- Prev by Date:
**Issue: TAILP-NIL (Version 5)** - Next by Date:
**New issue: IEEE-ATAN-BRANCH-CUT** - Previous by thread:
**Re: Issue: TAILP-NIL (Version 5)** - Next by thread:
**New issue: IEEE-ATAN-BRANCH-CUT** - Index(es):