Charles Hixson wrote:
[...]
OTOH, it seems far too late in the development process to be inserting such a
change in Python 2.6 or 3.0. If this is important to you, you should
probably propose it for 2.7/3.1.
It's been too late for over three months now, and the suggestions I've
seen so far a
On Sun, Jul 27, 2008 at 19:43, Charles Hixson
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Therefore it seems to me that the appropriate thing is to create a convention
> that bar-somethingprintable-bar
And the "something-printable" shows the main flaw of this approach.
Mathematics indeed uses a lot of symbols to
On Saturday 26 July 2008 01:23:17 am Nick Coghlan wrote:
> Sebastien Loisel wrote:
> > However, just for posterity (and I'm not going to pursue the argument
> > further than this), I'll say this. The problem of determining the
> > meaning (or overridability or whatever) of x=4$6 is the same as the
Sebastien Loisel wrote:
However, just for posterity (and I'm not going to pursue the argument
further than this), I'll say this. The problem of determining the
meaning (or overridability or whatever) of x=4$6 is the same as the
problem of determining the meaning of x=fooz(4,6). Since it's not a
Josiah Carlson wrote:
This is the first time anyone has mentioned "conciseness" in this
thread.
I thought it more or less went without saying. After
all, if conciseness isn't a goal, there's nothing
wrong with a plain function call, which can be as short
as 3 characters as well.
The trouble i
Scott Dial wrote:
I would argue that Python contains a "array of some_type" data type.
That sum() performs a left-fold of __add__ on the array is completely
independent of them being numbers.
That's not strictly true -- it explicitly refuses to operate
on strings (or at least it did last time
On Thu, Jul 24, 2008 at 7:08 PM, Greg Ewing <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Fredrik Johansson wrote:
>
>> Anyway, it is easy to define pseudo-operators in Python;
>>
>> A *matrixmul* B
>> A *dot* B
>> A *cross* B
>> A *elementwise* B
>
> Urg. This is another one of those recipes that I consider
> is t
Greg Ewing wrote:
Scott Dial wrote:
Perhaps I'm nobody, but I think this would be ridiculous. Matrices are
not native objects to the language.
Why should that matter? We already have things like
sum(), which operates on any sequence of numbers,
without needing a special "array of numbers" data
Fredrik Johansson wrote:
Anyway, it is easy to define pseudo-operators in Python;
A *matrixmul* B
A *dot* B
A *cross* B
A *elementwise* B
Urg. This is another one of those recipes that I consider
is too clever for its own good. Very nice in theory,
but I would never use it in real life.
What
Scott Dial wrote:
Perhaps I'm nobody, but I think this would be ridiculous. Matrices are
not native objects to the language.
Why should that matter? We already have things like
sum(), which operates on any sequence of numbers,
without needing a special "array of numbers" data
type. I don't see
On Fri, Jul 25, 2008 at 12:06 AM, Scott Dial
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Perhaps I'm nobody, but I think this would be ridiculous. Matrices are
> not native objects to the language. There is no type(matrix). The notion
> of what makes a Python object a matrix is a convention and to have
> built-i
Sebastien Loisel wrote:
Greg Ewing said:
I would actually be in favour of adding a matrix multiplication
operator
That would be helpful to me, for my students as well as my papers.
Perhaps I'm nobody, but I think this would be ridiculous. Matrices are
not native objects to the language. The
Greg Ewing said:
> I would actually be in favour of adding a matrix multiplication
> operator
That would be helpful to me, for my students as well as my papers.
Sincerely,
--
Sébastien Loisel
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
http://ma
On Wed, Jul 23, 2008, Sebastien Loisel wrote:
>
> [...] I was thinking that it would be simpler to have a way
> for defining new infix operators, [...]
python-dev is the wrong place for this discussion. Please use either
comp.lang.python or python-ideas.
--
Aahz ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) <*>
Josiah Carlson wrote:
What the heck does 'x = 4 $ 6' mean in Python? Oh, that's right, it's
a custom infix operator. But where is it defined?
It's not quite as bad as that -- it would be defined by
the relevant operator method on one of the operands. But
a convention would be needed for mappi
Dear Greg,
Thanks for your email.
Guido is on record as opposing any kind of macros
> or other "extensible syntax", and this probably comes
> under the same heading.
>
Thanks, that's exactly what I was looking for when I asked:
Now since this is such a simple idea, I'm guessing it occured to py
Sebastien Loisel wrote:
Essentially, in almost all applications, inv(A) is entirely wrong. You
can ask any numerical analyst who works with large problems, and they
will confirm it. One of the main reason is that, even if A is sparse,
inv(A) is full.
This argues for a function such as solve(
Dear Curt,
Thank you for your email.
Have you considered OCaml? (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ocaml) It's
>
I have. I've considered a lot of languages, but OCaml isn't for me. My
current language is MATLAB. Python is pretty close in syntax, and it's
widely accepted, so you can teach students Pyt
On Wed, Jul 23, 2008 at 4:48 PM, Sebastien Loisel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jul 23, 2008 at 7:11 PM, Josiah Carlson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>>
>> language, I would ask you if logix
>> (http://www.livelogix.net/logix/intro.html) would suit you better. It
>> seems to allow you to u
Dear Josiah,
Thank you for your email.
On Wed, Jul 23, 2008 at 7:11 PM, Josiah Carlson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> What the heck does 'x = 4 $ 6' mean in Python? Oh, that's right, it's
> a custom infix operator. But where is it defined? In the module? In
> some other module that is imported
On Wed, Jul 23, 2008 at 2:14 PM, Sebastien Loisel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Dear Pythonistas,
>
> I've googled for this but I wasn't able to find anything definitive. I was
> recently looking at scipy to see if I could use it in stead of MATLAB for my
> class on numerical PDEs, but I noticed tha
Dear Pythonistas,
I've googled for this but I wasn't able to find anything definitive. I was
recently looking at scipy to see if I could use it in stead of MATLAB for my
class on numerical PDEs, but I noticed that there's some difficulty related
to the notation; mainly, the matrix multiplication,
22 matches
Mail list logo
