On Sat, Mar 15, 2014 at 1:28 PM, Nathaniel Smith <n...@pobox.com> wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 15, 2014 at 3:41 AM, Nathaniel Smith <n...@pobox.com> wrote: > > Hi all, > > > > Here's the main blocker for adding a matrix multiply operator '@' to > Python: > > we need to decide what we think its precedence and associativity should > be. > > Another data point that might be useful: > > Matlab: same-left > > R: tight-left > I was going to ask this earlier, but I was worried I was missing something major. Why was "tight-left" not an option? This means that if you don't use parentheses, you get: a @ b @ c -> (a @ b) @ c a * b @ c -> a * (b @ c) a @ b * c -> (a @ b) * c In my (very inexperienced) opinion, it seems like the most intuitive option. Cheers, -Joe > IDL: same-left > > GAUSS: same-left (IIUC -- any GAUSS experts please correct me if I > misunderstood the fine manual) > > Mathematica: instead of having an associativity, a @ b @ c gets > converted into mdot([a, b, c]) > > -- > Nathaniel J. Smith > Postdoctoral researcher - Informatics - University of Edinburgh > http://vorpus.org > _______________________________________________ > NumPy-Discussion mailing list > NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org > http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion >
_______________________________________________ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
