X-Authentication-Warning:	delorie.com: mail set sender to djgpp-workers-bounces using -f
Date:	Thu, 1 Jul 2004 11:47:42 +0300 (EET DST)
From:	Esa A E Peuha <peuha AT cc DOT helsinki DOT fi>
Sender:	peuha AT sirppi DOT helsinki DOT fi
To:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Subject:	Re: C99 complex functions
In-Reply-To:	<129.451d04c3.2e147a51@aol.com>
Message-ID:	<Pine.OSF.4.58.0407011111460.20113@sirppi.helsinki.fi>
References:	<129 DOT 451d04c3 DOT 2e147a51 AT aol DOT com>
MIME-Version:	1.0
Reply-To:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Errors-To:	nobody AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To:	listserv AT delorie DOT com

On Wed, 30 Jun 2004 Kbwms AT aol DOT com wrote:

> Here is the name that I pulled from copies from Posix:
>
> NAME
> > cacosh, cacoshf, cacoshl - complex arc hyperbolic cosine functions
>
> at
>
> The Open Group Base Specifications Issue 6
> IEEE Std 1003.1, 2004 Edition
>
> http://www.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/009695399/toc.htm

Yes, but that is wrong.

> Also, the name "complex arc hyperbolic cosine"
>  is the terminology used on page 174 of ISO/IEC 9899-1999 (E).

That is also wrong.

> I've never heard of "area hyperbolic cosine."

Then you haven't read any mathematical literature about these functions.
See, for example, http://planetmath.org/encyclopedia/AreaFunctions.html
for the explanation about why the inverses of hyperbolic functions are
called area functions.  It's unfortunate that ANSI C99 and related
standards are wrong, but that's no reason to repeat their mistakes.

-- 
Esa Peuha
student of mathematics at the University of Helsinki
http://www.helsinki.fi/~peuha/

- Raw text -