Re: lambertw

On Wed, Nov 29, 2023 at 10:44:18AM +0100, Karim Belabas wrote:
> * Ilya Zakharevich [2023-11-21 04:50]:
> >   gp > ?lambertw
> >   lambertw(y,{branch=0}): solution of the implicit equation
> >   x*exp(x)=y. In the p-adic case, gives a solution of x*exp(x)=y if x
> >   has positive valuation, of x+log(x)=log(y) otherwise.
> > 
> > First, I would rewrite it as log(x)+x = log(y) to make the match more
> > clear.

> All fixed in master. Thanks for your report !

Thank!

BTW: did not this report look strange?  Sorry: I started to write down
a very DIFFERENT report — because these docs COMPLETELY confused me,
and I thought that two semantics for the p-adic case “differed by one
extra log”!  Only after writing down ¾ of it I realized that the
situation is not as bad as I thought.

Anyway, I hope this may help somebody else too… 

Yours,
Ilya