Talk:Fibonacci n-step number sequences: Difference between revisions
Content added Content deleted
m (→octonacci vs. octanacci: OEIS editors ruling. -- ~~~~) |
|||
| Line 14: | Line 14: | ||
::: Yeah, in my REXX calculator, I accept both names. OEIS uses octanacci (with a misspelled ''octoancci'' reference that points to the ''octanacci'' sequence), and Wolfram Mathworld ™ doesn't mention either one. It's like the word ''hexadecimal'' --- it's wrong (mixing Greek with Latin), but it's too late to change it now. The common usage is so ingrained that everybody uses it and knows what it means. I suspect it will be with '''octo''' & '''octa'''. -- [[User:Gerard Schildberger|Gerard Schildberger]] 19:09, 25 May 2012 (UTC) |
::: Yeah, in my REXX calculator, I accept both names. OEIS uses octanacci (with a misspelled ''octoancci'' reference that points to the ''octanacci'' sequence), and Wolfram Mathworld ™ doesn't mention either one. It's like the word ''hexadecimal'' --- it's wrong (mixing Greek with Latin), but it's too late to change it now. The common usage is so ingrained that everybody uses it and knows what it means. I suspect it will be with '''octo''' & '''octa'''. -- [[User:Gerard Schildberger|Gerard Schildberger]] 19:09, 25 May 2012 (UTC) |
||
:::: This just in ... the OEIS editors corrected the "misspelled/inconsistant" word (if only to be consistant with the other uses of the ''octanacci'' words, but they mentioned that both terms appear to be correct. That's good enough for me. -- [[User:Gerard Schildberger|Gerard Schildberger]] 19:14, 25 May 2012 (UTC) |
|||
==undecanacci numbers== |
==undecanacci numbers== |
||