>> But lgamma(x) is log(abs(gamma(x))), so it looks okay to me.
>>
>> Duncan Murdoch
TH> Oops, yes! That's what comes of talking off the top of my head
TH> (I don't think I've ever had occasion to evaluate lgamma(x)
TH> for negative x, so never consciously checked in ?lgamma).
TH> Thanks, Duncan!
Indeed.... as we all know, a picture can be worth a thousand words,
and a simple R call such as
plot(lgamma, -7, 0, n=1000)
would have saved many words, and notably spared us from
yet-another erroneous non-bug report.
Martin