I planned to use "raw" +,-,/ and * for element-wise operations and <*> for dot product. But yes, it's always nice to have some options like <@>, as Michal suggests. It could also be great to have ./ and .* for element-wize, like in MathLab/Octave, but this syntactic sugar is not worth the confusion it will bring into the language, I believe.
On Thursday, May 17, 2018 at 4:40:54 PM UTC+4, Michał Muskała wrote: > > On 17 May 2018, 14:29 +0200, José Valim <[email protected] <javascript:>>, > wrote: > > Let's go with this proposal then: <+>, <->, <*> and </> with the same > precedence as the math equivalents. > > > > I believe this might not be enough for the matrix library, because it > would need to multiplications - for dot product and cross product. I think > it planned to use regular * for dot product and <*> for cross product (or > the reverse). But now the plan is to drop "raw" * and use <*> instead, this > leaves the other product operator not accounted for. Should we go for > something like <@> or maybe <x> for the other product operator? > > Michał. > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "elixir-lang-core" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/elixir-lang-core/9c254fd0-f571-4b4a-aeb5-e43655e9b40e%40googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
