Chaim Frenkel wrote:
>
> > "PRL" == Perl6 RFC Librarian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> PRL>%DataHash = unpack $mypic, $SomePackedCobolData;
>
> Does it unpack it into the hash? Or does it keep a pointer into
> the original structure?
I'd think it would depend on if %DataHash is define
> Consider the problem of multiplying together two 2-dimensional tensors. In
> standard notation, this would be symbolized by
>
>Cijkl = Aij * Bkl
>
> where the letters i, j, k and l are written as subscripts and represent
> the indices of their respective tensors. To accomplish that same
> Wouldn't it be very useful if all of the applicable polymorphic methods
> of RFC 159 would be overloadable for nD arrays (arrays becoming
> effectively instances of array objects)? I am not sure if this has been
> discussed before but I could think of a whole lot of applications. Often
> you m
Jeremy Howard wrote:
>
>
>
> > Wouldn't it be very useful if all of the applicable polymorphic methods
> > of RFC 159 would be overloadable for nD arrays (arrays becoming
> > effectively instances of array objects)? I am not sure if this has been
> > discussed before but I could think of a whol
Christian Soeller wrote:
> Jeremy Howard wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > > Wouldn't it be very useful if all of the applicable polymorphic
methods
> > > of RFC 159 would be overloadable for nD arrays (arrays becoming
> > > effectively instances of array objects)? I am not sure if this has
been
> > > discu
Maybe that's already implicit in the broadcasting proposal but it
wouldn't hurt to spell it out:
A dimension size of 1 should be broadcasted to match that of the
other operand. So, for example, the following shapes (returned by
@#array) are compatible:
@c = @a *
Christian Soeller wrote:
> Maybe that's already implicit in the broadcasting proposal but it
> wouldn't hurt to spell it out:
>
> A dimension size of 1 should be broadcasted to match that of the
> other operand. So, for example, the following shapes (returned by
> @#array) are compatible:
>
Jeremy Howard wrote:
> To be honest, I don't really get the point of stuff like NumPy's "NewAxis",
> so I might be misunderstanding your proposal. But at least for your
It's just another way to specify how implicit loops of a scalar
operation are iterated over array elements (TIMTWTDI). Very mu
Nathan Torkington wrote:
> Larry's going to release a draft of his langauge decisions on the 1st
> of October.
>
> My plan to prevent a flood of 100 new RFCs on September 30:
>
> - deadline for new RFCs of Sep 25. After that, only discussion of
>old ones.
>
> - send mail to existing autho
