Closed axkr closed 5 months ago
The same case for EqQ[m+1/2]
used as unary function?
Looks like a typo to me, too. My best guess is that Albert meant to write NeQ[e^2, 4*d*f]
or NeQ[e^2-4*d*f, 0]
in the first case and something similar in the second. But I can't be sure. @stblake, do you have any idea?
Fixed.
For the
NeQ[e^2-4*d*f]
call I can't find a unary function definition:https://github.com/RuleBasedIntegration/Rubi/blob/f7fa0fd7bfacd326bc9e125473c5bad41cfad4e4/Rubi/IntegrationRules/1%20Algebraic%20functions/1.2%20Trinomial%20products/1.2.1%20Quadratic/1.2.1.4%20(a%2Bb%20x%2Bc%20x%5E2)%5Ep%20(d%2Be%20x%2Bf%20x%5E2)%5Eq.m#L124
Only a binary definition is available:
https://github.com/RuleBasedIntegration/Rubi/blob/f7fa0fd7bfacd326bc9e125473c5bad41cfad4e4/Rubi/IntegrationUtilityFunctions.m#L368