5 Nov
2004
5 Nov
'04
8:43 a.m.
On Friday 05 November 2004 14:11, you wrote:
It's worse: Since according to IEEE +0 is not equal to -0, atan2 is not a function!
Sorry, I meant to write: Since according to IEEE +0 *is* to be regarded as equal to -0, atan2 is not a function. (Because it gives different values for argument combinations -0, +0.) Ben