+@cindex branch cut
+For functions that have a branch cut in the complex plane GiNaC follows
+the conventions for C++ as defined in the ANSI standard as far as
+possible. In particular: the natural logarithm (@code{log}) and the
+square root (@code{sqrt}) both have their branch cuts running along the
+negative real axis where the points on the axis itself belong to the
+upper part (i.e. continuous with quadrant II). The inverse
+trigonometric and hyperbolic functions are not defined for complex
+arguments by the C++ standard, however. In GiNaC we follow the
+conventions used by CLN, which in turn follow the carefully designed
+definitions in the Common Lisp standard. It should be noted that this
+convention is identical to the one used by the C99 standard and by most
+serious CAS. It is to be expected that future revisions of the C++
+standard incorporate these functions in the complex domain in a manner
+compatible with C99.
+
+@subsection Multiple polylogarithms
+
+@cindex polylogarithm
+@cindex Nielsen's generalized polylogarithm
+@cindex harmonic polylogarithm
+@cindex multiple zeta value
+@cindex alternating Euler sum
+@cindex multiple polylogarithm
+
+The multiple polylogarithm is the most generic member of a family of functions,
+to which others like the harmonic polylogarithm, Nielsen's generalized
+polylogarithm and the multiple zeta value belong.
+Everyone of these functions can also be written as a multiple polylogarithm with specific
+parameters. This whole family of functions is therefore often refered to simply as
+multiple polylogarithms, containing @code{Li}, @code{H}, @code{S} and @code{zeta}.
+
+To facilitate the discussion of these functions we distinguish between indices and
+arguments as parameters. In the table above indices are printed as @code{m}, @code{s},
+@code{n} or @code{p}, whereas arguments are printed as @code{x}.
+
+To define a @code{Li}, @code{H} or @code{zeta} with a depth greater than one, you have to
+pass a GiNaC @code{lst} for the indices @code{m} and @code{s}, and in the case of @code{Li}
+for the argument @code{x} as well.
+Note that @code{Li} and @code{zeta} are polymorphic in this respect. They can stand in for
+the classical polylogarithm and Riemann's zeta function (if depth is one), as well as for
+the multiple polylogarithm and the multiple zeta value, respectively. Note also, that
+GiNaC doesn't check whether the @code{lst}s for two parameters do have the same length.
+It is up to the user to ensure this, otherwise evaluating will result in undefined behavior.
+
+The functions print in LaTeX format as
+@tex
+${\rm Li\;\!}_{m_1,m_2,\ldots,m_k}(x_1,x_2,\ldots,x_k)$,
+@end tex
+@tex
+${\rm S}_{n,p}(x)$,
+@end tex
+@tex
+${\rm H\;\!}_{m_1,m_2,\ldots,m_k}(x)$ and
+@end tex
+@tex
+$\zeta(m_1,m_2,\ldots,m_k)$.
+@end tex
+If @code{zeta} is an alternating zeta sum, i.e. @code{zeta(m,s)}, the indices with negative sign
+are printed with a line above, e.g.
+@tex
+$\zeta(5,\overline{2})$.
+@end tex
+The order of indices and arguments in the GiNaC @code{lst}s and in the output is the same.
+
+Definitions and analytical as well as numerical properties of multiple polylogarithms
+are too numerous to be covered here. Instead, the user is refered to the publications listed at the
+end of this section. The implementation in GiNaC adheres to the definitions and conventions therein,
+except for a few differences which will be explicitly stated in the following.
+
+One difference is about the order of the indices and arguments. For GiNac we adopt the convention
+that the indices and arguments are understood to be in the same order as in which they appear in
+the series representation. This means
+@tex
+${\rm Li\;\!}_{m_1,m_2,m_3}(x,1,1) = {\rm H\;\!}_{m_1,m_2,m_3}(x)$ and
+@end tex
+@tex
+${\rm Li\;\!}_{2,1}(1,1) = \zeta(2,1) = \zeta(3)$, but
+@end tex
+@tex
+$\zeta(1,2)$ evaluates to infinity.
+@end tex
+So in comparison to the referenced publications the order of indices and arguments for @code{Li}
+is reversed.
+
+The functions only evaluate if the indices are integers greater than zero, except for the indices
+@code{s} in @code{zeta} and @code{m} in @code{H}. Since @code{s} will be interpreted as the sequence
+of signs for the corresponding indices @code{m}, it must contain 1 or -1, e.g.
+@code{zeta(lst(3,4), lst(-1,1))} means
+@tex
+$\zeta(\overline{3},4)$.
+@end tex
+The definition of @code{H} allows indices to be 0, 1 or -1 (in expanded notation) or equally to
+be any integer (in compact notation). With GiNaC expanded and compact notation can be mixed,
+e.g. @code{lst(0,0,-1,0,1,0,0)}, @code{lst(0,0,-1,2,0,0)} and @code{lst(-3,2,0,0)} are equivalent as
+indices. The anonymous evaluator @code{eval()} tries to reduce the functions, if possible, to
+the least-generic multiple polylogarithm. If all arguments are unit, it returns @code{zeta}.
+Arguments equal to zero get considered, too. Riemann's zeta function @code{zeta} (with depth one)
+evaluates also for negative integers and positive even integers. For example:
+
+@example
+> Li({3,1},{x,1});
+S(2,2,x)
+> H({-3,2},1);
+-zeta({3,2},{-1,-1})
+> S(3,1,1);
+1/90*Pi^4
+@end example
+
+It is easy to tell for a given function into which other function it can be rewritten, may
+it be a less-generic or a more-generic one, except for harmonic polylogarithms @code{H}
+with negative indices or trailing zeros (the example above gives a hint). Signs can
+quickly be messed up, for example. Therefore GiNaC offers a C++ function
+@code{convert_H_to_Li()} to deal with the upgrade of a @code{H} to a multiple polylogarithm
+@code{Li} (@code{eval()} already cares for the possible downgrade):
+
+@example
+> convert_H_to_Li({0,-2,-1,3},x);
+Li({3,1,3},{-x,1,-1})
+> convert_H_to_Li({2,-1,0},x);
+-Li({2,1},{x,-1})*log(x)+2*Li({3,1},{x,-1})+Li({2,2},{x,-1})
+@end example
+
+Every function apart from the multiple polylogarithm @code{Li} can be numerically evaluated for
+arbitrary real or complex arguments. @code{Li} only evaluates if for all arguments
+@tex
+$x_i$ the condition
+@end tex
+@tex
+$x_1x_2\cdots x_i < 1$ holds.
+@end tex
+
+@example
+> Digits=100;
+100
+> evalf(zeta({3,1,3,1}));
+0.005229569563530960100930652283899231589890420784634635522547448972148869544...
+@end example
+
+If a function evaluates to infinity, no exceptions are raised, but the function is returned
+unevaluated, e.g.
+@tex
+$\zeta(1)$.
+@end tex
+In long expressions this helps a lot with debugging, because you can easily spot
+the divergencies. But on the other hand, you have to make sure for yourself, that no illegal
+cancellations of divergencies happen.
+
+Useful publications:
+
+@cite{Nested Sums, Expansion of Transcendental Functions and Multi-Scale Multi-Loop Integrals},
+S.Moch, P.Uwer, S.Weinzierl, hep-ph/0110083
+
+@cite{Harmonic Polylogarithms},
+E.Remiddi, J.A.M.Vermaseren, Int.J.Mod.Phys. A15 (2000), pp. 725-754
+
+@cite{Special Values of Multiple Polylogarithms},
+J.Borwein, D.Bradley, D.Broadhurst, P.Lisonek, Trans.Amer.Math.Soc. 353/3 (2001), pp. 907-941
+
+@node Solving Linear Systems of Equations, Input/Output, Built-in Functions, Methods and Functions
+@c node-name, next, previous, up
+@section Solving Linear Systems of Equations
+@cindex @code{lsolve()}
+
+The function @code{lsolve()} provides a convenient wrapper around some
+matrix operations that comes in handy when a system of linear equations
+needs to be solved:
+
+@example
+ex lsolve(const ex &eqns, const ex &symbols, unsigned options=solve_algo::automatic);
+@end example
+
+Here, @code{eqns} is a @code{lst} of equalities (i.e. class
+@code{relational}) while @code{symbols} is a @code{lst} of
+indeterminates. (@xref{The Class Hierarchy}, for an exposition of class
+@code{lst}).
+
+It returns the @code{lst} of solutions as an expression. As an example,
+let us solve the two equations @code{a*x+b*y==3} and @code{x-y==b}:
+
+@example
+@{
+ symbol a("a"), b("b"), x("x"), y("y");
+ lst eqns, vars;
+ eqns = a*x+b*y==3, x-y==b;
+ vars = x, y;
+ cout << lsolve(eqns, vars) << endl;
+ // -> @{x==(3+b^2)/(b+a),y==(3-b*a)/(b+a)@}
+@end example
+
+When the linear equations @code{eqns} are underdetermined, the solution
+will contain one or more tautological entries like @code{x==x},
+depending on the rank of the system. When they are overdetermined, the
+solution will be an empty @code{lst}. Note the third optional parameter
+to @code{lsolve()}: it accepts the same parameters as
+@code{matrix::solve()}. This is because @code{lsolve} is just a wrapper
+around that method.
+
+
+@node Input/Output, Extending GiNaC, Solving Linear Systems of Equations, Methods and Functions
+@c node-name, next, previous, up
+@section Input and output of expressions
+@cindex I/O
+
+@subsection Expression output
+@cindex printing
+@cindex output of expressions
+
+Expressions can simply be written to any stream:
+
+@example
+@{
+ symbol x("x");
+ ex e = 4.5*I+pow(x,2)*3/2;
+ cout << e << endl; // prints '4.5*I+3/2*x^2'
+ // ...
+@end example
+
+The default output format is identical to the @command{ginsh} input syntax and
+to that used by most computer algebra systems, but not directly pastable
+into a GiNaC C++ program (note that in the above example, @code{pow(x,2)}
+is printed as @samp{x^2}).
+
+It is possible to print expressions in a number of different formats with
+a set of stream manipulators;
+
+@example
+std::ostream & dflt(std::ostream & os);
+std::ostream & latex(std::ostream & os);
+std::ostream & tree(std::ostream & os);
+std::ostream & csrc(std::ostream & os);
+std::ostream & csrc_float(std::ostream & os);
+std::ostream & csrc_double(std::ostream & os);
+std::ostream & csrc_cl_N(std::ostream & os);
+std::ostream & index_dimensions(std::ostream & os);
+std::ostream & no_index_dimensions(std::ostream & os);
+@end example
+
+The @code{tree}, @code{latex} and @code{csrc} formats are also available in
+@command{ginsh} via the @code{print()}, @code{print_latex()} and
+@code{print_csrc()} functions, respectively.
+
+@cindex @code{dflt}
+All manipulators affect the stream state permanently. To reset the output
+format to the default, use the @code{dflt} manipulator:
+
+@example
+ // ...
+ cout << latex; // all output to cout will be in LaTeX format from now on
+ cout << e << endl; // prints '4.5 i+\frac@{3@}@{2@} x^@{2@}'
+ cout << sin(x/2) << endl; // prints '\sin(\frac@{1@}@{2@} x)'
+ cout << dflt; // revert to default output format
+ cout << e << endl; // prints '4.5*I+3/2*x^2'
+ // ...
+@end example
+
+If you don't want to affect the format of the stream you're working with,
+you can output to a temporary @code{ostringstream} like this:
+
+@example
+ // ...
+ ostringstream s;
+ s << latex << e; // format of cout remains unchanged
+ cout << s.str() << endl; // prints '4.5 i+\frac@{3@}@{2@} x^@{2@}'
+ // ...
+@end example
+
+@cindex @code{csrc}
+@cindex @code{csrc_float}
+@cindex @code{csrc_double}
+@cindex @code{csrc_cl_N}
+The @code{csrc} (an alias for @code{csrc_double}), @code{csrc_float},
+@code{csrc_double} and @code{csrc_cl_N} manipulators set the output to a
+format that can be directly used in a C or C++ program. The three possible
+formats select the data types used for numbers (@code{csrc_cl_N} uses the
+classes provided by the CLN library):
+
+@example
+ // ...
+ cout << "f = " << csrc_float << e << ";\n";
+ cout << "d = " << csrc_double << e << ";\n";
+ cout << "n = " << csrc_cl_N << e << ";\n";
+ // ...
+@end example
+
+The above example will produce (note the @code{x^2} being converted to
+@code{x*x}):
+
+@example
+f = (3.0/2.0)*(x*x)+std::complex<float>(0.0,4.5000000e+00);
+d = (3.0/2.0)*(x*x)+std::complex<double>(0.0,4.5000000000000000e+00);
+n = cln::cl_RA("3/2")*(x*x)+cln::complex(cln::cl_I("0"),cln::cl_F("4.5_17"));
+@end example
+
+@cindex @code{tree}
+The @code{tree} manipulator allows dumping the internal structure of an
+expression for debugging purposes:
+
+@example
+ // ...
+ cout << tree << e;
+@}
+@end example
+
+produces
+
+@example
+add, hash=0x0, flags=0x3, nops=2
+ power, hash=0x0, flags=0x3, nops=2
+ x (symbol), serial=0, hash=0xc8d5bcdd, flags=0xf
+ 2 (numeric), hash=0x6526b0fa, flags=0xf
+ 3/2 (numeric), hash=0xf9828fbd, flags=0xf
+ -----
+ overall_coeff
+ 4.5L0i (numeric), hash=0xa40a97e0, flags=0xf
+ =====
+@end example
+
+@cindex @code{latex}
+The @code{latex} output format is for LaTeX parsing in mathematical mode.
+It is rather similar to the default format but provides some braces needed
+by LaTeX for delimiting boxes and also converts some common objects to
+conventional LaTeX names. It is possible to give symbols a special name for
+LaTeX output by supplying it as a second argument to the @code{symbol}
+constructor.
+
+For example, the code snippet
+
+@example
+@{
+ symbol x("x", "\\circ");
+ ex e = lgamma(x).series(x==0,3);
+ cout << latex << e << endl;
+@}
+@end example
+
+will print
+
+@example
+ @{(-\ln(\circ))@}+@{(-\gamma_E)@} \circ+@{(\frac@{1@}@{12@} \pi^@{2@})@} \circ^@{2@}+\mathcal@{O@}(\circ^@{3@})
+@end example
+
+@cindex @code{index_dimensions}
+@cindex @code{no_index_dimensions}
+Index dimensions are normally hidden in the output. To make them visible, use
+the @code{index_dimensions} manipulator. The dimensions will be written in
+square brackets behind each index value in the default and LaTeX output
+formats:
+
+@example
+@{
+ symbol x("x"), y("y");
+ varidx mu(symbol("mu"), 4), nu(symbol("nu"), 4);
+ ex e = indexed(x, mu) * indexed(y, nu);
+
+ cout << e << endl;
+ // prints 'x~mu*y~nu'
+ cout << index_dimensions << e << endl;
+ // prints 'x~mu[4]*y~nu[4]'
+ cout << no_index_dimensions << e << endl;
+ // prints 'x~mu*y~nu'
+@}
+@end example
+
+
+@cindex Tree traversal
+If you need any fancy special output format, e.g. for interfacing GiNaC
+with other algebra systems or for producing code for different
+programming languages, you can always traverse the expression tree yourself:
+
+@example
+static void my_print(const ex & e)
+@{
+ if (is_a<function>(e))
+ cout << ex_to<function>(e).get_name();
+ else
+ cout << ex_to<basic>(e).class_name();
+ cout << "(";
+ size_t n = e.nops();
+ if (n)
+ for (size_t i=0; i<n; i++) @{
+ my_print(e.op(i));
+ if (i != n-1)
+ cout << ",";
+ @}
+ else
+ cout << e;
+ cout << ")";
+@}
+
+int main()
+@{
+ my_print(pow(3, x) - 2 * sin(y / Pi)); cout << endl;
+ return 0;
+@}
+@end example
+
+This will produce
+
+@example
+add(power(numeric(3),symbol(x)),mul(sin(mul(power(constant(Pi),numeric(-1)),
+symbol(y))),numeric(-2)))
+@end example
+
+If you need an output format that makes it possible to accurately
+reconstruct an expression by feeding the output to a suitable parser or
+object factory, you should consider storing the expression in an
+@code{archive} object and reading the object properties from there.
+See the section on archiving for more information.
+
+
+@subsection Expression input
+@cindex input of expressions
+
+GiNaC provides no way to directly read an expression from a stream because
+you will usually want the user to be able to enter something like @samp{2*x+sin(y)}
+and have the @samp{x} and @samp{y} correspond to the symbols @code{x} and
+@code{y} you defined in your program and there is no way to specify the
+desired symbols to the @code{>>} stream input operator.
+
+Instead, GiNaC lets you construct an expression from a string, specifying the
+list of symbols to be used:
+
+@example
+@{
+ symbol x("x"), y("y");
+ ex e("2*x+sin(y)", lst(x, y));
+@}
+@end example
+
+The input syntax is the same as that used by @command{ginsh} and the stream
+output operator @code{<<}. The symbols in the string are matched by name to
+the symbols in the list and if GiNaC encounters a symbol not specified in
+the list it will throw an exception.
+
+With this constructor, it's also easy to implement interactive GiNaC programs:
+
+@example
+#include <iostream>
+#include <string>
+#include <stdexcept>
+#include <ginac/ginac.h>
+using namespace std;
+using namespace GiNaC;
+
+int main()
+@{
+ symbol x("x");
+ string s;
+
+ cout << "Enter an expression containing 'x': ";
+ getline(cin, s);
+
+ try @{
+ ex e(s, lst(x));
+ cout << "The derivative of " << e << " with respect to x is ";
+ cout << e.diff(x) << ".\n";
+ @} catch (exception &p) @{
+ cerr << p.what() << endl;
+ @}
+@}
+@end example
+
+
+@subsection Archiving
+@cindex @code{archive} (class)
+@cindex archiving
+
+GiNaC allows creating @dfn{archives} of expressions which can be stored
+to or retrieved from files. To create an archive, you declare an object
+of class @code{archive} and archive expressions in it, giving each
+expression a unique name:
+
+@example
+#include <fstream>
+using namespace std;
+#include <ginac/ginac.h>
+using namespace GiNaC;
+
+int main()
+@{
+ symbol x("x"), y("y"), z("z");
+
+ ex foo = sin(x + 2*y) + 3*z + 41;
+ ex bar = foo + 1;
+
+ archive a;
+ a.archive_ex(foo, "foo");
+ a.archive_ex(bar, "the second one");
+ // ...
+@end example
+
+The archive can then be written to a file:
+
+@example
+ // ...
+ ofstream out("foobar.gar");
+ out << a;
+ out.close();
+ // ...
+@end example
+
+The file @file{foobar.gar} contains all information that is needed to
+reconstruct the expressions @code{foo} and @code{bar}.
+
+@cindex @command{viewgar}
+The tool @command{viewgar} that comes with GiNaC can be used to view
+the contents of GiNaC archive files:
+
+@example
+$ viewgar foobar.gar
+foo = 41+sin(x+2*y)+3*z
+the second one = 42+sin(x+2*y)+3*z
+@end example
+
+The point of writing archive files is of course that they can later be
+read in again:
+
+@example
+ // ...
+ archive a2;
+ ifstream in("foobar.gar");
+ in >> a2;
+ // ...
+@end example
+
+And the stored expressions can be retrieved by their name:
+
+@example
+ // ...
+ lst syms;
+ syms = x, y;
+
+ ex ex1 = a2.unarchive_ex(syms, "foo");
+ ex ex2 = a2.unarchive_ex(syms, "the second one");
+
+ cout << ex1 << endl; // prints "41+sin(x+2*y)+3*z"
+ cout << ex2 << endl; // prints "42+sin(x+2*y)+3*z"
+ cout << ex1.subs(x == 2) << endl; // prints "41+sin(2+2*y)+3*z"
+@}
+@end example
+
+Note that you have to supply a list of the symbols which are to be inserted
+in the expressions. Symbols in archives are stored by their name only and
+if you don't specify which symbols you have, unarchiving the expression will
+create new symbols with that name. E.g. if you hadn't included @code{x} in
+the @code{syms} list above, the @code{ex1.subs(x == 2)} statement would
+have had no effect because the @code{x} in @code{ex1} would have been a
+different symbol than the @code{x} which was defined at the beginning of
+the program, although both would appear as @samp{x} when printed.
+
+You can also use the information stored in an @code{archive} object to
+output expressions in a format suitable for exact reconstruction. The
+@code{archive} and @code{archive_node} classes have a couple of member
+functions that let you access the stored properties:
+
+@example
+static void my_print2(const archive_node & n)
+@{
+ string class_name;
+ n.find_string("class", class_name);
+ cout << class_name << "(";
+
+ archive_node::propinfovector p;
+ n.get_properties(p);
+
+ size_t num = p.size();
+ for (size_t i=0; i<num; i++) @{
+ const string &name = p[i].name;
+ if (name == "class")
+ continue;
+ cout << name << "=";
+
+ unsigned count = p[i].count;
+ if (count > 1)
+ cout << "@{";
+
+ for (unsigned j=0; j<count; j++) @{
+ switch (p[i].type) @{
+ case archive_node::PTYPE_BOOL: @{
+ bool x;
+ n.find_bool(name, x, j);
+ cout << (x ? "true" : "false");
+ break;
+ @}
+ case archive_node::PTYPE_UNSIGNED: @{
+ unsigned x;
+ n.find_unsigned(name, x, j);
+ cout << x;
+ break;
+ @}
+ case archive_node::PTYPE_STRING: @{
+ string x;
+ n.find_string(name, x, j);
+ cout << '\"' << x << '\"';
+ break;
+ @}
+ case archive_node::PTYPE_NODE: @{
+ const archive_node &x = n.find_ex_node(name, j);
+ my_print2(x);
+ break;
+ @}
+ @}
+
+ if (j != count-1)
+ cout << ",";
+ @}
+
+ if (count > 1)
+ cout << "@}";
+
+ if (i != num-1)
+ cout << ",";
+ @}
+
+ cout << ")";
+@}
+
+int main()
+@{
+ ex e = pow(2, x) - y;
+ archive ar(e, "e");
+ my_print2(ar.get_top_node(0)); cout << endl;
+ return 0;
+@}
+@end example
+
+This will produce:
+
+@example
+add(rest=@{power(basis=numeric(number="2"),exponent=symbol(name="x")),
+symbol(name="y")@},coeff=@{numeric(number="1"),numeric(number="-1")@},
+overall_coeff=numeric(number="0"))
+@end example
+
+Be warned, however, that the set of properties and their meaning for each
+class may change between GiNaC versions.
+
+
+@node Extending GiNaC, What does not belong into GiNaC, Input/Output, Top
+@c node-name, next, previous, up
+@chapter Extending GiNaC
+
+By reading so far you should have gotten a fairly good understanding of
+GiNaC's design patterns. From here on you should start reading the
+sources. All we can do now is issue some recommendations how to tackle
+GiNaC's many loose ends in order to fulfill everybody's dreams. If you
+develop some useful extension please don't hesitate to contact the GiNaC
+authors---they will happily incorporate them into future versions.
+
+@menu
+* What does not belong into GiNaC:: What to avoid.
+* Symbolic functions:: Implementing symbolic functions.
+* Printing:: Adding new output formats.
+* Structures:: Defining new algebraic classes (the easy way).
+* Adding classes:: Defining new algebraic classes (the hard way).
+@end menu
+
+
+@node What does not belong into GiNaC, Symbolic functions, Extending GiNaC, Extending GiNaC
+@c node-name, next, previous, up
+@section What doesn't belong into GiNaC
+
+@cindex @command{ginsh}
+First of all, GiNaC's name must be read literally. It is designed to be
+a library for use within C++. The tiny @command{ginsh} accompanying
+GiNaC makes this even more clear: it doesn't even attempt to provide a
+language. There are no loops or conditional expressions in
+@command{ginsh}, it is merely a window into the library for the
+programmer to test stuff (or to show off). Still, the design of a
+complete CAS with a language of its own, graphical capabilities and all
+this on top of GiNaC is possible and is without doubt a nice project for
+the future.
+
+There are many built-in functions in GiNaC that do not know how to
+evaluate themselves numerically to a precision declared at runtime
+(using @code{Digits}). Some may be evaluated at certain points, but not
+generally. This ought to be fixed. However, doing numerical
+computations with GiNaC's quite abstract classes is doomed to be
+inefficient. For this purpose, the underlying foundation classes
+provided by CLN are much better suited.
+
+
+@node Symbolic functions, Printing, What does not belong into GiNaC, Extending GiNaC
+@c node-name, next, previous, up
+@section Symbolic functions