On Wednesday 07 May 2003 18:34, Matthew Donadio wrote:
Any other thoughts?
Name redundancy: Poly.Poly, Poly.polysubst Is this redundancy essential? You
are assuming the user will include the module's scope, right?
Polynomial functions: the scientific computing community has a great variety
of algorithms for solution of numerical problems you might find many things
of use in their writings. Just an off-the-top-of my head remark.
There is surely a lot to be done in mathematical libraries. I had looked for a
clean, small DCT routine and I had to write it myself when I implemented a
sound synthesizer. (I just wrote the formula as it is so it wasn't efficient
:) )
Regards,
--
Eray Ozkural (exa)