[net.math] What does FORTRAN have to do with mathematics?

ags@pucc-i (Seaman) (02/20/84)

No one mentioned this during the recent discussion of i**i, but I think
I have found the reason that a number of people insisted that the
principle value of the logarithm is the one with imaginary part in
(-PI,PI].

It's defined that way in X3.9-1978 (the FORTRAN standard).

That definition is just as good as any other, but it is not a universally
accepted one.  It seems that FORTRANers are only interested in getting an
answer, not in understanding the problem.  Consider complex exponentiation
for example.  There are infinitely many values to choose from, but somehow
FORTRAN manages to compute a unique value.  In order to do this, you have
to give up such things as continuity.

I recall the time an irate user demanded to know why his program kept
bombing every time it tried to compute A**B, where A and B were real 
and A happened to be negative.  When I asked him what sort of answer 
he hoped to get in that situation, he said he didn't know.  He just 
wanted an answer so his program would run.
-- 

Dave Seaman
..!pur-ee!pucc-i:ags

"Against people who give vent to their loquacity 
by extraneous bombastic circumlocution."