On Sun, Mar 16, 2014 at 4:37 PM, Colin J. Williams <cjwilliam...@gmail.com> wrote: > I would like to see the case made for @. Yes, I know that Guido has > accepted the idea, but he has changed his mind before.
I'm not sure how to usefully respond to this, since, I already wrote a ~20 page document making the case for @? Maybe if you think the arguments in it aren't good, it would be more helpful to explain which ones and why? > The PEP seems neutral to retaining both np.matrix and @. I'm not sure what gives you this impression. The main point of the whole first section of the PEP is to explain why the existence of np.matrix causes problems and why a substantial majority of developers hate it, and how adding @ will let us solve these problems. Whether we actually get rid of np.matrix is a more complicated question (we'll need sort of compatibility/transition strategy, it will depend on how quickly python versions with @ support are adopted, etc.), but at the very least the goal is that @ eventually replace it in all new code. -n -- 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
