Open jodavies opened 1 week ago
I have programs that use this. Hence, better to change the manual.
On 13 Nov 2024, at 16:34, jodavies @.***> wrote:
Currently the islyndon+ and islyndon- syntax doesn't work. I have fixed this, but I also noticed that the definitions are backwards compared to the manual. The code implies that islyndon == islyndon< == islyndon+ and islyndon> == islyndon-.
Switching the +/- around in principle breaks existing scripts. Do you prefer to change the manual or the code?
— Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/vermaseren/form/issues/576, or unsubscribe https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ABJPCEQOVUHC64J5NHSW3N32ANWPDAVCNFSM6AAAAABRWYV3TSVHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43ASLTON2WKOZSGY2TKOBZG43DANA. You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
In fact, maybe I am wrong in that existing programs use this, since it didn't actually work: are you sure you used +,-
rather than >,<
? I needed to add the cases here for FORM to not just crash with syntax error:
https://github.com/vermaseren/form/blob/3c5b5ceb132588b4ffc1b1d69dc84b228aa5f201/sources/transform.c#L166
I just checked that in the latest program I used it with >. Probably in all others as well.
On 13 Nov 2024, at 17:03, jodavies @.***> wrote:
In fact, maybe I am wrong in that existing programs use this, since it didn't actually work: are you sure you used +,- rather than >,<? I needed to add the cases here for FORM to not just crash with syntax error: https://github.com/vermaseren/form/blob/3c5b5ceb132588b4ffc1b1d69dc84b228aa5f201/sources/transform.c#L166
— Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/vermaseren/form/issues/576#issuecomment-2474040435, or unsubscribe https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ABJPCEVFRSABXY7HMA52Q432ANZ3VAVCNFSM6AAAAABRWYV3TSVHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43OSLTON2WKQ3PNVWWK3TUHMZDINZUGA2DANBTGU. You are receiving this because you commented.
Currently the
islyndon+
andislyndon-
syntax doesn't work. I have fixed this, but I also noticed that the definitions are backwards compared to the manual. The code implies thatislyndon == islyndon< == islyndon+
andislyndon> == islyndon-
.Switching the
+/-
around in principle breaks existing scripts. Do you prefer to change the manual or the code?