[Octave-bug-tracker] [bug #45877] mahalanobis is wrong (and probably belongs to the statistics package)

[Lachlan Andrew]

Follow-up Comment #4, bug #45877 (project octave):

Thanks, Rik,

Is the  mahal.m  that I sent satisfactory?  Is there anything else I need to
do?

Out of interest, what was the rationale for deprecating mahalanobis?  As I
pointed out, it is a *different* function from mahal.

Since it isn't a common function, and isn't in Matlab, it is likely that
nobody was using it, but I don't understand the motivation for removing it. 
If there was an existing log10 but not log, would you remove log10 when log
was implemented?  This is much worse than that, because  log10  can easily be
calculated from log,  but  mahalanobis can't (as?) easily be calculated from 
mahal.

    _______________________________________________________

Reply to this item at:

  <http://savannah.gnu.org/bugs/?45877>

_______________________________________________
  Message sent via/by Savannah
  http://savannah.gnu.org/