Re: The GP command “?”

I do use ? as I still don't know the section numbers.  I wouldn't mind
having something like ?sections, but surely*noone* uses ?? to display
users.dvi !? So we could make ?? do what ? does now (or at least the top
part).

John

On Sun, 10 Dec 2023, 11:12 Bill Allombert, <
[email protected]> wrote:

> On Sat, Dec 09, 2023 at 07:49:50PM -0800, Ilya Zakharevich wrote:
> > Are people ACTUALLY using “the sections” in the results of the GP command
> >      ?
> > ?  Myself, I use only “the tail” of its output.  I do not ever recall
> > finding what ?1 outputs useful in the slightest…
>
> The start of the list is more for beginner, the end more for advanced
> users.
>
> > (However, the output of ?19, ?20, ?21 is quite useful (although
>  these is
> > NOT LISTED in the output of
> >       ?
>
> ?19, ?20, ?21 list functions that are private to the GP interpreter and
> cannot
> be called normally.
>
> For example,
>
> ? _factor_Aurifeuille(5,5)
>   ***   syntax error, unexpected invalid token, expecting end of file:
> _factor_Aurifeuille(5,5)
> ? _*_(5,5)
>   ***   syntax error, unexpected invalid token, expecting end of file:
> _*_(5,5)
>
> Though it is possible to call them using alias:
> ? alias("mul","_*_")
> ? mul(5,5)
> %4 = 25
> ? fold(mul,[1..100])==100!
> %5 = 1
>
> Cheers,
> Bill.
>
>