[email protected] wrote: > On Wed, Apr 28, 2010 at 1:30 PM, David Warde-Farley <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> On 2010-04-28, at 12:05 PM, Travis Oliphant wrote: >> >> >>> a(b) is equivalent to dot(a,b) >>> >>> a(b)(c) would be equivalent to dot(dot(a,b),c) >>> >>> This seems rather reasonable. >>> >> Indeed, and it leads to a rather pleasant way of permuting syntax to change >> the order of operations, i.e. a(b(c)) vs. a(b)(c). >> > > I like the explicit dot method much better, __call__ (parentheses) can > mean anything, and reading the code will be more difficult. > (especially when switching from matlab) > Yes, you have a point, though I do think it would read easier as a method, a.dot(b.dot(c)) or a.dot(b).dot(c) rather than as a prefix/function.
(Down the line, another concern is the fact that dot() always incurs a memory allocation for the result, which matters sometimes when you have a huge amount of data and limited RAM. As I currently understand the situation, it shouldn't be hard to add an optional 'out' argument or a gaxpy primitive that maps directly onto the BLAS call; I just haven't had time yet to investigate it further.) David David _______________________________________________ NumPy-Discussion mailing list [email protected] http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
