Re: Core Euphoria Functions
- Posted by George Orr <gorr at w?h.rr.?om> Jan 24, 2008
- 550 views
CChris wrote: > > Robert Craig wrote: > > > > George Orr wrote: > > > To Rob and company - > > > > > > Is there a reason that we have the natural logarithm log(x) as a core > > > Euphoria > > > function but do not have exp(x)? I know I can get the equivalent using > > > power(x,y) > > > provided I remember the value of e to enough significant places. > > > > I didn't like to add lots of very simple global functions that > > the programmer could create for himself, probably in > > less time than it would take him to browse through the manual. > > > > We have "PI" in misc.e. > > We could add "e" as well, > > but I bet that would cause a lot of naming conflicts. > > > > Regards, > > Rob Craig > > Rapid Deployment Software > > <a href="http://www.RapidEuphoria.com">http://www.RapidEuphoria.com</a> > > For largish values of x (around 12 iirc, I don't have my test files at hand), > power(E,x) starts drifting from exp(x), even with the most accurate value of > E as double.. > Introducing exp() would have the side benefit of not needing to define E - > because > of the likely name clashes -, since exp(1.0) would work well. > > CChris I tried this and didn't really see any difference until x is larger than 20 and insignificant differences afterwards. For x = 30 difference between the power(x,y) and libm exp(x) solution was less than 0.02 in ten trillion. Of course, libm could be unstable in this range as well! I don't really see a problem in accuracy, although I would prefer to have exp(x) as a core Euphoria function. George