[Scilab-users] cotg and acot

[Federico Miyara]

Dear Samuel,

>> I wonder why this function doesn't follow the tacit rule that 
>> trigonometric functions are notated with three-letter names 
>
> There is no such rule, even tacit. Shortness is much weaker than 
> clarity, and to me cot is really unclear (and too short).

There is, indeed, a rule. It is included in ISO Standard 8000 Part 2 
(Mathematical signs and symbols to be used in natural sciences and 
technology), clause 13, and states that the symbol for "cotangent of x" 
is cot /x/, and that ctg should not be used (it says nothing about cotg, 
I acknowledge, but preference is clearly for cot).

I don't see why cot would be unclear.

> The shorter are reserved keywords, the more probable are conflicts 
> with custom current variables. So this "g" is welcome.

The same would apply to sin or cos or to any of the short or long 
function names. I think the basic knowledge of common symbols is the 
responsibility of the user. If a user decided to use cot as a custom 
variable and then wants to use the same symbol as the trigonometric 
function (without clearing first the variable) there is a programming 
style problem.

The only problem I see with cot would be a backward compatibility one, 
which could be handled by keeping cotg during some versions and, if 
there is any difference between the Matlab cot and the Scilab cot/cotg, 
introducing a mtlb_cot function as happens with other functions used in 
the matlab to scilab conveersion tool.

Regards,

Federico Miyara





-- 
El software de antivirus Avast ha analizado este correo electrónico en busca de virus.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.scilab.org/pipermail/users/attachments/20190930/1a4f2f5f/attachment.htm>