Re: Question about undocumented notation.
Bill Allombert <[email protected]> Mon, 6 Jul 2026 22:20:36 +0200
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.mathematics.pari.user |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <akwOFDM86eWOaL4h@seventeen> |
On Mon, Jul 06, 2026 at 01:21:30PM -0600, Juan José Alba González wrote: > Hi. In the OEIS I run into the following line of pari code: > > intnum(x=0, [[1], 1], 1/gamma(1+x)) > > Apparently, this is equivalent to > > intnum(x=0, [+oo, 1], 1/gamma(1+x)) > > but the documentation doesn't mention anything like that. > > I'm wondering if they are actually equivalent and why apparently [1] is > replaced by +oo in this context. In order PARI version, oo was not supported and [1] was used instead. The documentation even recommended to do oo=[1] PARI still allows [1] as a place-holder for oo to avoid breaking old GP scripts and the OEIS. Cheers, Bill.