# [racket-dev] Hyperbolic functions

Three hours ago, Matthias Felleisen wrote:
>*
*>* On Jun 26, 2012, at 12:07 AM, Neil Toronto wrote:
*>*
*>* > It would, and I'd be happy to do it while I'm on vacation next
*>* > month. Can you submit a change request?
*>* >
*>* > More generally, what would the Powers That Be think of my adding
*>* > various special functions (like probit, inverse probit, Bessel
*>* > functions, gamma, log gamma, etc.) to racket/math? I've already
*>* > written quite a few in Typed Racket for my own use.
*>* >
*>* > Come to think of it, racket/math is a great candidate for being
*>* > written in Typed Racket but the racket collection has to be
*>* > compiled before typed-racket. Is there a way around that?
*>*
*>* I'd love to see math as a TR library. Does it have to be in racket/
*>* ?
*
+1 for not being in `racket/math' -- it'll be the same kind of
dependency that brings up the mess factor.
One way to get the benefits of TR without a dependency could be:
* Write the code (without the types) in "racket/private/math.rktl"
* Include it as-is in "racket/math.rkt"
* Have a "typed/racket/math.rkt" that includes the same source and
adds the types.
But if the goal is to have *much* more mathy functions, then it seems
better to just have a new toplevel collection.
--
((lambda (x) (x x)) (lambda (x) (x x))) Eli Barzilay:
http://barzilay.org/ Maze is Life!