Boost logo

Boost Users :

Subject: Re: [Boost-users] Bessel and Hypergeometric functions wanted, was: (no subject)
From: davidrbergman_at_[hidden]
Date: 2012-03-19 09:24:13

Thanks again.
I am familiar with gsl. I guess I will be writing some custom functions for the specific application I need.

On another note I didn't see a post to question 1, does the bessel function family take complex argument?


Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry

-----Original Message-----
From: John Maddock <boost.regex_at_[hidden]>
Sender: boost-users-bounces_at_[hidden]
Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2012 13:15:27
To: <boost-users_at_[hidden]>
Reply-To: boost-users_at_[hidden]
Subject: Re: [Boost-users] Bessel and Hypergeometric functions wanted,
        was: (no subject)

>This may be a snippet from a question I submitted. Thanks for replying.
>There are many values of arguments for the Hypergeometric function for
>which it does not reduce to another special function.
>So in a nutshell that was the use case, a generic hypergeometric function
>that could not be expressed as another special function.
>Also, in my post I mentioned that the boost documentation listed these as
>unsupported TR1 functions. Can you clarify what this means?
>Does TR1 handle hypergeometric functions?

Yes, they were added to the TR1 spec. However, that's part of the TR that
did not make it into C++11 and to my knowledge no one has actually
implemented them for the reasons I gave. I believe GSL has them
but once you dig into the code there are lots of comments to the effect that
they don't always behave well in some regions - and that's just the bits
they've managed to test - to repeat, a function with > 3 real valued args is
untestable over the whole domain, that's *why* they're broken down into more
precisely defined functions.

Regards, John.

Boost-users mailing list

Boost-users list run by williamkempf at, kalb at, bjorn.karlsson at, gregod at, wekempf at