Anonymous user
Talk:Numerical integration: Difference between revisions
→the deletion of the Common Lisp entry: added a tank qew.
(→the deletion of the Common Lisp entry: added a tank qew.) |
|||
| (3 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) | |||
Line 1:
==Java's trap function==
The Trap function in the Java example does not call F(X). Is this an error? --[[User:Waldorf|Waldorf]] 14:21, 21 December 2007 (MST)
:Good catch. I'm working on it now. --[[User:Mwn3d|Mwn3d]] 14:29, 21 December 2007 (MST)
Line 31 ⟶ 32:
Computation time didn't bother me, but I think the choice of n being up in the millions causes multiple digits of precision to be lost in accumulated representation error. The result is that differences between methods are obscured by the common effect of accumulated representation error. I agree, 32 would be a fine number. So would 4, or 10, or even 1000. —[[User:Sonia|Sonia]] 22:40, 14 January 2011 (UTC)
== missing or incomplete output(s) ==
Has anyone else noticed that almost '''1/2''' of the programming examples don't have any output or have an incomplete output? (Output should have twenty results). -- [[User:Gerard Schildberger|Gerard Schildberger]] ([[User talk:Gerard Schildberger|talk]]) 22:00, 28 June 2016 (UTC)
== the deletion of the ''Common Lisp'' entry ==
Why was the '''Common Lisp''' programming language entry replaced with '''Comal''' with no explanation (on July 3<sup>rd</sup>) ? -- [[User:Gerard Schildberger|Gerard Schildberger]] ([[User talk:Gerard Schildberger|talk]]) 21:55, 3 July 2019 (UTC)
Thanks, [[User:Thundergnat|Thundergnat]], for restoring the '''Common Lisp''' entry. -- [[User:Gerard Schildberger|Gerard Schildberger]] ([[User talk:Gerard Schildberger|talk]]) 20:42, 4 July 2019 (UTC)
| |||