[Cfp-interest 3044] Re: Kahan's paper regarding pow(0,0)

[Damian McGuckin]

My apologies for claiming that 0^0 was (mathematically) 1 during today's 
meeting. I have been using that value computationally for so long, I had 
forgotten the rigorous mathematical definition.  Scary.

At the risk of being called a 'name dropper', Euler claimed that 0^0 == 1 
in 1752. Then again, Cauchy proved him wrong nearly 70 years later.

Thanks for those paper Jerome. They make fascinating reading. And one is 
just over 40 years old. The other is just over 35 years old.

That same paper also supports your use of the word 'singularity' which is 
interesting.

Thanks again - Damian