Raymond Toy (NC/EUS) writes:
>Sometime ago, we discussed unifying maxima's use of %j and bessel_j (and other Bessel functions) to use bessel_j and friends.
>
>I've taken a look at this finally, and think I know how to do this. Do we want to keep backward compatibility and accept %j? Or just get rid of it completely?
>
>There are a couple of other related issues. The docs for specint show that there's also %p (Legendre functions?) and %m (Whittaker's confluent hypergeometric function?). Do we want to replace these as well. I don't think maxima knows anything about %m. Maybe the specfun package knows about %p. (Sorry for the vagueness. I don't have the docs with me right now.)
>
>Not to mention hstruve[n](x), li[n](x) and so on. These should, perhaps, be changed to hstruve(n,x) and li(n,x). Or something better for li.
>
>Ray
>
>
>
Personally, I prefer to get rid of old %j, %p, %m
and hstruve[n](x) completely and replace them by
something more clear and systematic.
According to aopted naming convention
%p -> legendre_p
hstruve -> struve_h
%m -> whittacker_m
What is li[n](x)? I don't see it in the docs.
It seems that there are also %w, %q, %he and lstruve
which may be replaced by
whittacker_w
legendre_q
hermite_h
struve_l
--
Vadim V. Zhytnikov
<vvzhy@mail.ru>
<vvzhy@netorn.ru>