Re: [boost] [math/staticstics/design] How besttonamestatisticalfunctions?

From: John Maddock (john_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-07-11 12:50:37

Paul A Bristow wrote:
>>  -----Original Message-----
>>  From: boost-bounces_at_[hidden]
>>  [mailto:boost-bounces_at_[hidden]] On Behalf Of Deane Yang
>>  Sent: 11 July 2006 17:15
>>  To: boost_at_[hidden]
>>  Subject: Re: [boost] [math/staticstics/design] How best
>>  tonamestatisticalfunctions?
>>
>>  > What about the Qs? (complements)
>>
>>  In other words, 1 - P. Right? One response is why do you
>>  need to define
>>  it, given how easy it is to get from the cumulative density
>> function?
>>
>>  If not, use a common name for it. Unfortunately, I don't have a good
>>  suggestion.
>
> Perhaps not really needed? Is there an accuracy reason for both?

It depends how accurate you want to be: calculating 1-P incurs cancellation 
error if P is very near 1, where as for most (all?) distributions we can 
calculate Q directly without the subraction from unity.

>>  Here's a first stab (I'm sure it can be improved):
>>
>>  class StudentsT
>>  {

I think the "Boostified" name would be in all lower case: students_t or 
whatever.

John.