[Neerajpathak07]

Progresses #649

Description

What is the purpose of this pull request?

This pull request:

• adds C implementation for math/base/special/betainc

Related Issues

Does this pull request have any related issues?

This pull request:

• progresses [RFC]: Add C implementations to base special math functions (tracking issue) #649

Questions

Any questions for reviewers of this pull request?

No.

Other

Any other information relevant to this pull request? This may include screenshots, references, and/or implementation notes.

No.

Checklist

Please ensure the following tasks are completed before submitting this pull request.

• Read, understood, and followed the contributing guidelines

---

@stdlib-js/reviewers

[Neerajpathak07]

This PR will need the C implementation for math/base/special/kernel-betainc to be merged to develop.

[Neerajpathak07]

Reference:-

[rautelaKamal]

Hey @Neerajpathak07, was reviewing this since it depends on kernel-betainc which I've been following closely. Found a few things in src/main.c that might block compilation:

Line 52 uses double out = [ 0.0, 0.0 ] which is JS syntax - in C this would need to be separate variable declarations like double out; double deriv;

Lines 53-54 redeclare regularized and upper, which are already function parameters - compiler will error there.

Line 55 calls stdlib_base_kernelBetainc but the actual C function in #10279 is stdlib_base_kernel_betainc (snake_case), and it expects pointer arguments (&out, &deriv) rather than array and stride.

The header include on line 27 should be kernel_betainc.h instead of kernelbetainc.h.

Also minor - the @returns JSDoc says "natural logarithm of beta function" but the function returns the incomplete beta value, worth updating to avoid confusion.

Hope this helps move things forward!

[github-actions]

⚠️ Issue Reference Review

An automated check found a potentially unrelated issue/PR reference in this PR:

Reference	Assessment	Reasoning
#3423	suspicious	PR adds math/base/special/betainc (the regularized incomplete beta function), but #3423 is an RFC specifically requesting a C implementation for the stats/base/dists/beta/cdf package (different directory, different RFC requirements). While betainc is the underlying mathematical implementation of the beta CDF, the RFC requires adding C source, native addon, tests, benchmarks, and examples to the stats/base/dists/beta/cdf package itself — which this PR does not appear to do.

Why this matters: GitHub automatically closes issues referenced with closing keywords (Resolves, Closes, Fixes) when the PR is merged. If Resolves #3423 is merged, the stats/base/dists/beta/cdf RFC would be automatically closed even though that package's C implementation hasn't been added yet.

What to do:

• If this PR truly resolves the stats/base/dists/beta/cdf RFC in full (i.e., it also adds C implementation, native addon, benchmarks, and examples to that package), then no action is needed.
• If this PR only adds math/base/special/betainc (a prerequisite/dependency of stats/base/dists/beta/cdf), consider changing Resolves #3423 to Progresses #3423 or Related to #3423 to avoid accidentally closing the RFC.

This assessment was generated by an AI model and is informational only.

Generated by Check PR Issue References · ◷

[Neerajpathak07]

@rautelaKamal why do we have multiple duplicate comments here correct me if I am mistaken here but are you using any LLM's to perform code reviews?

[0PrashantYadav0]

Hi @Neerajpathak07 , since PR #10279 is merged now I think you can move ahead with implementation of math/base/special/betainc. Few of my PR depends on these.

[Planeshifter]

/stdlib update-copyright-years

[Neerajpathak07]

@Planeshifter accidently marked this open. I am on the changes and testing those to resolve the CI.

[stdlib-bot]

Coverage Report

Package	Statements	Branches	Functions	Lines
math/base/special/betainc	$\\color{green}170/170$ $\\color{green}+0.00\\%$	$\\color{green}13/13$ $\\color{green}+0.00\\%$	$\\color{green}2/2$ $\\color{green}+0.00\\%$	$\\color{green}170/170$ $\\color{green}+0.00\\%$

The above coverage report was generated for the changes in this PR.

[Neerajpathak07]

Since Lint failure is not related to changes in this PR. I'll go ahead and request a review.

[Neerajpathak07]

@Planeshifter Can we try and land this in the following week so as to unblock beta and binomial distributions.

[Planeshifter]

Needed to do significant clean-up, but should be good to go now.

Note: We need to ensure the license comments are accurate; in this case, since this package is a thin wrapper around kernel-betainc, I removed the license comment and LICENSE file. But notice they were inconsistent with each other and incorrect.

Also, the EditorConfig lint failures were due to the changes in this PR, see a77b061 which caused the checkmark to turn green.

[stdlib-bot]

PR Commit Message

feat: add C implementation for `math/base/special/betainc`

PR-URL: https://github.com/stdlib-js/stdlib/pull/4037
Ref: https://github.com/stdlib-js/stdlib/issues/649

Co-authored-by: Philipp Burckhardt <pburckhardt@outlook.com>
Co-authored-by: stdlib-bot <noreply@stdlib.io>
Reviewed-by: Philipp Burckhardt <pburckhardt@outlook.com>
Signed-off-by: Philipp Burckhardt <pburckhardt@outlook.com>

Please review the above commit message and make any necessary adjustments.

⚠️ Action Required: This PR references tracking issues. Please update the PR description to replace any "Closes", "Fixes", or "Resolves" keywords with "Ref" when referencing these issues.