-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Hi,
Nope, I did not. I will try to look closer to this on weekend, but I doubt that we could obtain reliable values in that domain of arguments. Patrick Alken wrote: > Hi, thanks for the report. Do you have an example of calling the > gsl_sf_coulomb_wave_FG_e function with input arguments that lead to > the wrong output? This would be useful in making test cases for > this issue. > > Patrick > > On 06/18/2013 11:58 PM, Alexey A. Illarionov wrote: Accidentally > found a bug in specfun/coulomb.c . Trivial error in solution of > quadratic equation. None of the current test cases are influenced > by this bug since the value of C (actually N) determines only the > condition of applicability of "continued fraction+recursion" > algorithm. > > === modified file 'specfunc/coulomb.c' --- specfunc/coulomb.c > 2007-07-02 18:34:24 +0000 +++ specfunc/coulomb.c 2012-10-26 > 04:27:18 +0000 @@ -1121,7 +1121,7 @@ * we must go at > least as low as lam_G */ const double SMALL = > GSL_SQRT_DBL_EPSILON; - const double C = sqrt(1.0 + > 4.0*x*(x-2.0*eta)); + const double C = 0.5 * sqrt(1.0 + > 4.0*x*(x-2.0*eta)); const int N = ceil(lam_F - C + 0.5); const > double lam_0 = lam_F - GSL_MAX(N, 0); const double lam_min = > GSL_MIN(lam_0, lam_G); > > -- С уважением, Алексей Александрович Илларионов. >> > - -- С уважением, Алексей Александрович Илларионов. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.19 (GNU/Linux) iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJRwmFkAAoJEEBWYSFzoNKecpwH/jVeqJ+KtkfNo7QZJwAEpJNj Rs7joTxt7+n320C/qGNY/k5ivgCkJAUwgi0khweXl04uRqJBsHO/jHwbdbx9cW6t kZZTde/EEUf8g8OA7/x9WDvxpO3D1NgTJbBJnSmqs3J4q77oztBCWCgxuOWWLaks KNNQH1CW5yV2+hWA7CbL30rDSqwco94Fy2gMGgxUVPx8GHjBcgmaEM34mKDIM2VH WuhK6CC2tekIEalPUbvnz2KDYOc12Fv9wSctrEt+srBHPxrG5HU9LQmAufVneHfw b+xNEKgWTGRxjGxfFffA35JKoGYq4sak3okthtHHLxNOsdF/LpacGunWqrOdp40= =51hh -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
