RoyalX

makefact can handle it, too

There is a minor issue with the inverse_erf and inverse_erfc functions. The problem is that Maxima is unable to simplify inverse_erf(erf(x)) and inverse_erfc(erfc(x)) symbolically. Additionally, some problems arise when attempting numerical evaluation. First, there is significant numerical error: inverse_erf(erf(5)),numer evaluates to 5.000004776115367. Second, inverse_erf(erf(6)),numer and inverse_erfc(erfc(28)),numer cannot be evaluated at all, since due to floating-point error the inverse functions...

There is a minor issue with the inverse_erf and inverse_erfc functions. The problem is that Maxima is unable to simplify inverse_erf(erf(x)) and inverse_erfc(erfc(x)) symbolically. Additionally, some problems arise when attempting numerical evaluation. First, there is significant numerical error: inverse_erf(erf(5)),numer evaluates to 5.000004776115367. Second, inverse_erf(erf(6)),numer and inverse_erfc(erfc(28)),numer cannot be evaluated at all, since due to floating-point error the inverse functions...

There is a minor issue with the inverse_erf and inverse_erfc functions. The problem is that Maxima is unable to simplify inverse_erf(erf(x)) and inverse_erfc(erfc(x)) symbolically. Additionally, some problems arise when attempting numerical evaluation. First, there is significant numerical error: inverse_erf(erf(5)),numer evaluates to 5.000004776115367. Second, inverse_erf(erf(6)),numer and inverse_erfc(erfc(28)),numer cannot be evaluated at all, since due to floating-point error the inverse functions...

There is a minor issue with the inverse_erf and inverse_erfc functions. The problem is that Maxima is unable to simplify inverse_erf(erf(x)) and inverse_erfc(erfc(x)) symbolically. Additionally, some problems arise when attempting numerical evaluation. First, there is significant numerical error: inverse_erf(erf(5)),numer evaluates to 5.000004776115367. Second, inverse_erf(erf(6)),numer and inverse_erfc(erfc(27.23669183)),numer cannot be evaluated at all, since due to floating-point error the inverse...

That's good progress, but it's worth noting that sylvester_matrix and krylov_matrix are still undocumented as well.

double_factorial is a more powerful function than !!. Unlike !!, double_factorial behaves like Factorial2 / !! from Mathematica - that is, it can also accept negative numbers as an argument, with the exception of negative even integers. double_factorial also handles complex numbers correctly. I think nothing needs to be removed. Both double_factorial and the !! operator should be kept. This is exactly the approach taken in Mathematica, for instance - not everyone prefers to use unary operators. Therefore,...

Yes, I agree with you that it’s quite easy to create a pull request on GitHub — you just fork the repository, make your changes (patches), and then submit a pull request.