|This article is the subject of an educational assignment supported by Wikipedia Ambassadors through the India Education Program.|
|WikiProject Mathematics||(Rated C-class, Mid-importance)|
Order of arguments
This article isn't very clear about the order of the two arguments x and y in the atan2() function call. Many people will incorrectly assume at first glance that it is atan2(x,y) -- the text should be more explicit (I missed the order in the "more specifically" text the first 3 times I read it). I maintain a parser for an expression language where atan2(a,b) returns atan(b/a) rather than C's atan(a/b)...
The C-language atan2 is convenient to apply by remembering that tangent = opposite/adjacent. Since angle = atan2(opposite,adjacent), it's easy to remember. Hollimb 18:43, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
The first note under "Definition"
The first note under the section "Definition" read to the effect that adding 2π to a result in the range (-π,π] resulted in the range (0,2π], which doesn't seem correct. I've changed it to read that adding π has this effect, and have further clarified the line to reduce potential ambiguity regarding to which value the additional π is added.18.104.22.168 (talk) 17:52, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
It is not the first time I see someone changing for in the first paragraph (Indeed, I think I did so sometime in the past). I think this issue should be discussed here and an invisible comment should be kept in the article, for editor's guidance.
As a mathematical funcion, atan2 is defined as
It couldn't be because:
Therefore atan2's codomain is , NOT . I think the confusion arises from computational implementation and how it deals with signed zero.
Since "zero" is now a limit instead of finite real value, we have
but this is only a limit; mathematical atan2 function does NEVER gives that result. Rjgodoy 19:27, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
atan2 and atan
In Maxima atan2(x,1)=atan(x)
Adam majewski 21:02, 28 October 2007 (UTC)
Hi, I'm not sure where this link shall point out so I may put it here if someone knows how to fix it. There's a broken link in reference  where it says:
include the C-style atan2 function. The Linux Programmer's Manual  says:
Neither I do, but IA-32 Intel® Architecture Software Developer’s Manual. Volume 2A: Instruction Set Reference, A-M, 2004 should include a definition too. We could use it instead of The Linux Programmer's Manual. Rjgodoy (talk) 01:33, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
I don't understand why the 3D graph shows a slight curve in the profile visible along the negative x. Shouldn't the graph be a constant value of pi along here? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 22.214.171.124 (talk) 16:37, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
Actually it should be -pi/2. However there is no such a slight curve! After your comment I became very suspicious about the graph and plotted the surface by myself (thus I could verify that the values alongside x axis were correct and constant either -pi/2 or pi/2, but for x=0 y=0 of course). It seems to be a slight curve because of an optical illusion due to the perspective and the slight pendient wrt. y axis. Rjgodoy (talk) 21:35, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
The graph is nice but this graph has no axis labels. I don't suppose it means much to you as you know what the graph is saying but anyone like me who is not 100% sure would appreciate people sticking to the good old rule of labeling each and every axis in every graph ever. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 126.96.36.199 (talk) 22:16, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
- Did you note the statement in the article that Excel has the two arguments reversed? — Carl (CBM · talk) 02:36, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
Sign of output
The article states that the results are positive for y>0 and negative for y<0, but what about y=0? AFAICT, y<0 either gives 0 or π, so it should read that the results are positive for y>=0 and negative for y<0.--Subversive Sound (talk) 14:57, 9 July 2010 (UTC)
- The full definition is given later on, that's a very general idea of how angles are measured. You'd have people saying 0 isn't positive with the change you say. Dmcq (talk) 15:20, 9 July 2010 (UTC)
More stable/consistent 'non-condition' formula?
Is there maybe a more convoluted formula that doesn't require any conditions, but is also computationally stable and isn't often undefined when y=0 (or at least the latter) ? I think this would merit inclusion into the article. --Skytopia (talk) 22:32, 5 September 2010 (UTC)
In my opinion the section called "Derivative" uses needless complicated formulation, as if some finds such things interesting. As atan2 is a function of two variables, it suffices to just give both the partial derivatives. Nijdam (talk) 20:14, 12 November 2011 (UTC)