Talk:Chebyshev coefficients: Difference between revisions
(→Verify correct output.: new section) |
m (→C example is copyrighted: add sig) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
== C example is copyrighted == |
== C example is copyrighted == |
||
As documented (!) the code is straight from NR in C and should be removed. |
As documented (!) the code is straight from NR in C and should be removed. —[[User:Sonia|Sonia]] ([[User talk:Sonia|talk]]) 15:57, 21 August 2015 (UTC) |
||
== Verify correct output. == |
== Verify correct output. == |
||
Revision as of 15:57, 21 August 2015
C example is copyrighted
As documented (!) the code is straight from NR in C and should be removed. —Sonia (talk) 15:57, 21 August 2015 (UTC)
Verify correct output.
All examples other than C currently appear derived from C, which has no output. The J example has output for a test case and other examples have reproduced J's result, but some reassurance that the answer is correct would be nice. Numerical Recipes in C goes on to provide Chebyshev evaluation function. The task would be much more meaningful if the evaluation function were required also, with required output showing that the coefficents and evaluation function do accurately approximate some values of the original function.
Alternatively, task authors could code the evaluation function, run a test case through it, verify that it all works and then add the specific coefficents to the task description as required output.
Or alternatively, Clenshaw's recurrence might be added as a separate task, with the two tasks exchanging data and results. —Sonia (talk) 15:56, 21 August 2015 (UTC)