eriktaubeneck

Thanks, I just realized that when I introduced the notation above, I just used I(f), but then when I used it below I wrote Im(f). I will clear that up.

Great point, and I apologize for the confusion. The function should be C to C, with the added restriction of R to R.

Did not intend to make any claims that Python libraries don't do this, but rather to explore the subject as a way to better understand the implementation and limits of floating point numbers and numerical analysis based on them.

That's an interesting point I had not considered. My view (mostly from the math side, my shallow dive into physical systems was just from a PDE class in grad school) is from the view of unstable differential equations where very small changes to initial conditions can cause massive changes to the output of the system. My uninformed instincts would tell me that even with orders of more digits than atoms in a physical system, changes smaller than the available accuracy to initial conditions could have significant impact on the eventual state of the system.

This is what I originally had but I felt that the Python `while` was actually a bit more true to the way a C for loop is constructed (and `range` seems a very not C thing to do.) It's not perfect!

I like the solution, but I usually keep "The Zen of Python" in mind when writing 'Pythonic' code.

I like this one. I don't know enough Haskell to have come up with it on my own (but I should!)

While I wrote this with tongue in cheek, I also aimed to illuminate the power of Python's flexibility along with the inherent danger therein. I do admit the Javacious example was over the top though ;)