> I can understand the desire to generalise the idea of matrix > multiplication for when the arrays are not both 2-D but taking the > complex conjugate makes absolutely no sense in the context of matrix > multiplication. > > You note above that "vecmat is defined as x†A" but my interpretation > of that is that vecmat(x, A) == matmul(conjugate(transpose(x)), A). If > you want to define vecmat like that then maybe that makes sense in > some contexts but including the conjugate as an implicit part of > matmul is something that I would find very confusing: such a function > should not be called matmul.
Ah, that's indeed fair. So, I'll remove the idea to change what the special-casing of 1d arrays does in matmul. Options should just be to keep things as they are, or to remove that ability altogether. I'd personally tend to the latter. -- Marten _______________________________________________ NumPy-Discussion mailing list -- numpy-discussion@python.org To unsubscribe send an email to numpy-discussion-le...@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/numpy-discussion.python.org/ Member address: arch...@mail-archive.com
