On Fri, 14 May 2021 15:08:09 +0200, Roberto Bagnara <bagnara@cs.unipr.it> said:
RB> On 5/14/21 9:52 AM, Vladimir V. Kisil wrote: >> Dear Roberto! It seems that Ginsh and parser in GiNaC are >> implemented differently. Ginsh understands postfix factorial >> notation like "3!" but GiNaC parser is not. GiNaC parser is >> still happy with "factorial(3)". Best wishes, Vladimir >> RB> Thanks Vladimir! But please help me understand: I did not RB> change anything in the part of the code invoking the GiNaC RB> parser, and I did not change the tests. So the situation you RB> are describing, i.e., GiNaC parser not understanding postfix RB> factorial notation, is something that changed from, say, 10 RB> years ago. In other words, do you agree that, say, 10 years RB> ago, the GiNaC parser was accepting that notation? It seems that before 2008-08-21 GiNaC and Ginsh had used the same parser, which Ginsh is using till now. After a patch they diverged in this respect. So it is quite well possible that your code was running with the old version of GiNaC but cannot do this now without some alteration. -- Vladimir V. Kisil http://www.maths.leeds.ac.uk/~kisilv/ Book: Geometry of Mobius Maps https://doi.org/10.1142/p835 Soft: Geometry of cycles http://moebinv.sourceforge.net/ Jupyter notebooks: https://github.com/vvkisil/MoebInv-notebooks