Mathematica 9 is now available
Services & Resources / Wolfram Forums
-----
 /
MathGroup Archive
2002
*January
*February
*March
*April
*May
*June
*July
*August
*September
*October
*November
*December
*Archive Index
*Ask about this page
*Print this page
*Give us feedback
*Sign up for the Wolfram Insider

MathGroup Archive 2002

[Date Index] [Thread Index] [Author Index]

Search the Archive

RE: machine-size real number

  • To: mathgroup at smc.vnet.net
  • Subject: [mg35019] RE: [mg34996] machine-size real number
  • From: "David Park" <djmp at earthlink.net>
  • Date: Thu, 20 Jun 2002 02:13:15 -0400 (EDT)
  • Sender: owner-wri-mathgroup at wolfram.com

Marcello,

The reason you got the error message is because it is true. You didn't give
us enough information to tell why it is true. Either you did not make a
proper definition for the function xxx or the function is complex at that
point.

Try evaluating the function with specific values outside of the Plot
statement and you will almost certainly find that the problem is with the
function and not with Plot. Did you define the function with xxx[p_,x_]:=
something? Did you remember the underscore characters?

If you still cannot find the problem post your function to the news group.

David Park
djmp at earthlink.net
http://home.earthlink.net/~djmp/

> From: Marcello Losasso [mailto:Marcello.Losasso at cern.ch]
To: mathgroup at smc.vnet.net
>
>
> Hi,
> can anyone explain me why, when trying to plot a function defined
> in a usual
> way,
> do I get an error message of the form:
>
> Plot::plnr : xxx[0.03,x] is not a machine-size real number at
> x=4.16666666666666667*^-7
>
> Plot::plnr : xxx[0.03,x] is not a machine-size real number at
> x=0.40567576234524343
>
> Plot::plnr : xxx[0.03,x] is not a machine-size real number at
> x=0.84834563246262
>
> and then it stops.
>
> How can I check the function is ok?
> I run mathematica 4.1 on a windows2000 system.
>
>
> thank you for your help
>



  • Prev by Date: Re: Solve weirdness
  • Next by Date: Re: Solve weirdness
  • Previous by thread: Re: machine-size real number
  • Next by thread: Solve weirdness again