Re: Adding a generic mathematical library

[Max Nikulin]

On 19/07/2024 23:16, Richard Stallman wrote:
> Onsider, for instance, `hypotenuse'.  The benefit of having that
> functoin would not quite be zero, but it would be small.  Is it enough
> to justify the additional function name, and the complexity of
> documenting it?

As usual, when implementation is replaced with a better one, all callers 
may benefit with no efforts on their side.