[Cfp-interest 3037] Re: clog(INFINITY + i y)

[Damian McGuckin]

For discussion tomorrow:

In G.6, why use cis(y) which is not a C routine when one can use cexp(iy)
which is the same expression.

In G.6.2, G.6.3 and G.6.4, in the special cases there are clauses like

 	f(<argument>) returns <expression>  [<clause>]

where each <argument> has a general form

 	x + i y

Some clauses which qualify the domain of 'x' or 'y' use identical words 
except that some begin with a comma and others omit the comma. Should we 
make them consistent and always omit (or insert) the comma.

The functions satisfy

 		f(conj(z)) = conj(f(z))

Now because of the conjugate rule, the 'y' above has a domain

 	finite positive-signed y

which can be split into

 	finite positive y (I assume we do not need to add strictly)
and
 	+infinity
and
 	+0

Some clauses mention

 	for all non-zero numbers y

 	for finite non-zero y

 	for finite y

These are redundant due to the conjugate clause and should say respectively

 	for all positive y (numbers is omitted as it is never used elsewhere)

 	for finite non-zero y

 	for finite y

Which term is best

 	positive-signed finite y
or
 	finite positive-signed y

Both are used. Should we go for consistency?

Thanks - Damian