in reply to Re^4: Renaming the Schwartzian Transform
in thread Renaming the Schwartzian Transform

Wouldn't that be more like the Jacquonian Transform then? Not possessive, but derivative. It's not the Schwartz's transform.

-- Randal L. Schwartz, Perl hacker
Be sure to read my standard disclaimer if this is a reply.

  • Comment on Re^5: Renaming the Schwartzian Transform

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^6: Renaming the Schwartzian Transform
by ikegami (Patriarch) on Sep 23, 2005 at 23:22 UTC
    I kinda view those as the same, but if merlyn says it's called the Jacquonian Transform, who am I to argue! ;)
[reply]

In Section Meditations