Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Several complicated bug fixes (v2.0.0) #160

Merged
merged 4 commits into from
May 29, 2024
Merged

Several complicated bug fixes (v2.0.0) #160

merged 4 commits into from
May 29, 2024

Conversation

MathCookie17
Copy link
Collaborator

@MathCookie17 MathCookie17 commented Mar 6, 2024

  • Added a parameter to lambertw allowing you to calculate the non-principal branch
  • Changed all cases where a constant or parameter is returned directly, to reduce the likelihood of accidental mutation
  • Changed how tetration for bases <= e^1/e works: now the property x^^(n + 1) == x^(x^^n) always holds, and small bases with large payloads behave correctly.
  • Fixed f_gamma

* Added a parameter to lambertw allowing you to calculate the non-principal branch
* Changed all cases where a constant or parameter is returned directly, to reduce the likelihood of accidental mutation
* Changed how tetration for bases <= e^1/e works: now the property x^^(n + 1) == x^(x^^n) always holds, and small bases with large payloads behave correctly.
@MathCookie17
Copy link
Collaborator Author

MathCookie17 commented Mar 6, 2024

This update fixes #159 and #152 (EDIT: and #162). It also fixes #86, but it doesn't fully address it - it fixes the bug that began issue #86, but it does not do the nocopy reoptimization stuff, so it's your call on whether to leave 86 open or not.

There's a lot of changes in this, so perhaps there are more unit tests that should be run that I didn't think of? If there are, feel free to add whatever tests you deem necessary - my changes may have broken something I'm unaware of... and if you need me to explain why I made a particular change, then please ask.

Also, when pushing these commits, I got the message "This diff contains a change in line endings from 'LF' to 'CRLF'.". I think that's just a weird GitHub thing, but I figured I'd let you know in case it's actually a problem.

As described in #162
@Patashu
Copy link
Owner

Patashu commented May 28, 2024

Ok I'm evidently not going to get around to this repository any time soon and it's getting a decent amount of activity, so I'll add you as a collaborator. Ping me (email, twitter or discord works) any time you want me to npm publish. Enjoy your newfound powers!

@MathCookie17
Copy link
Collaborator Author

OK. I'm not going to merge this request just yet because I want to fix #168 first, but I'll try to get that done in the next few days.

This one's a breaking change, so I guess we're on v2.0.0 now!
@MathCookie17 MathCookie17 changed the title Several complicated bug fixes Several complicated bug fixes (v2.0.0) May 29, 2024
@MathCookie17 MathCookie17 merged commit 2fc9c07 into Patashu:master May 29, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants