Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 465: A dedicated infix operator for matrix multiplication

2014-04-09 17:37 GMT+02:00 Nathaniel Smith : > On Wed, Apr 9, 2014 at 4:25 PM, Björn Lindqvist wrote: >> 2014-04-08 14:52 GMT+02:00 Nathaniel Smith : >>> On Tue, Apr 8, 2014 at 9:58 AM, Björn Lindqvist wrote: 2014-04-07 3:41 GMT+02:00 Nathaniel Smith : > So, I guess as far as I'm concern

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 465: A dedicated infix operator for matrix multiplication

Guido, I am sorry to read this. I shall be responding more completely in a day or two. In my view, @ and @@ are completely redundant.  Both operations are  already provided, * and **, in numpy.matrix. PEP 465 provides no clear indication as to how

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 465: A dedicated infix operator for matrix multiplication

On Wed, Apr 9, 2014 at 4:25 PM, Björn Lindqvist wrote: > 2014-04-08 14:52 GMT+02:00 Nathaniel Smith : >> On Tue, Apr 8, 2014 at 9:58 AM, Björn Lindqvist wrote: >>> 2014-04-07 3:41 GMT+02:00 Nathaniel Smith : So, I guess as far as I'm concerned, this is ready to go. Feedback welcome: h

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 465: A dedicated infix operator for matrix multiplication

On 4/8/2014 6:32 PM, cjw wrote: Larry Hastings wasn't far from the truth. Larry's note was about adding (redundant) *NON-ascii* unicode symbols, in particular × == \xd7, as in A × B, as a synonym for '@'. Various people hav

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 465: A dedicated infix operator for matrix multiplication

2014-04-08 14:52 GMT+02:00 Nathaniel Smith : > On Tue, Apr 8, 2014 at 9:58 AM, Björn Lindqvist wrote: >> 2014-04-07 3:41 GMT+02:00 Nathaniel Smith : >>> So, I guess as far as I'm concerned, this is ready to go. Feedback welcome: >>> http://legacy.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0465/ >> >> Couldn't you

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 465: A dedicated infix operator for matrix multiplication

On 9 Apr 2014 12:34, "Robert Kern" wrote: > > On 2014-04-09 12:12, Nick Coghlan wrote: >> >> On 8 April 2014 18:32, cjw wrote: >>> >>> Guido, >>> >>> I am sorry to read this. >>> >>> I shall be responding more completely in a day or two. >>> >>> In my view, @ and @@ are completely redundant. Bot

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 465: A dedicated infix operator for matrix multiplication

On 2014-04-09 12:12, Nick Coghlan wrote: On 8 April 2014 18:32, cjw wrote: Guido, I am sorry to read this. I shall be responding more completely in a day or two. In my view, @ and @@ are completely redundant. Both operations are already provided, * and **, in numpy.matrix. PEP 465 provide

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 465: A dedicated infix operator for matrix multiplication

On 8 April 2014 18:32, cjw wrote: > Guido, > > I am sorry to read this. > > I shall be responding more completely in a day or two. > > In my view, @ and @@ are completely redundant. Both operations are already > provided, * and **, in numpy.matrix. > > PEP 465 provides no clear indication as to

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 465: A dedicated infix operator for matrix multiplication

On 9 Apr 2014 00:15, "Greg Ewing" wrote: > > Victor Stinner wrote: >> >> I started to implement the RFC 1924 to have a full support. >> >> 3 days later, when my code was working, I saw the date of the RFC... > > > Do you still have the code? It needn't go to waste -- this > would make a fine addit

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 465: A dedicated infix operator for matrix multiplication

Guido, I am sorry to read this. I shall be responding more completely in a day or two. In my view, @ and @@ are completely redundant.  Both operations are  already provided, * and **, in numpy.matrix. PEP 465 provides no clear indication as to how

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 465: A dedicated infix operator for matrix multiplication

2014-04-09 1:13 GMT+02:00 Greg Ewing : > Victor Stinner wrote: >> >> I started to implement the RFC 1924 to have a full support. >> >> 3 days later, when my code was working, I saw the date of the RFC... > > > Do you still have the code? It needn't go to waste -- this > would make a fine addition t

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 465: A dedicated infix operator for matrix multiplication

Victor Stinner wrote: I started to implement the RFC 1924 to have a full support. 3 days later, when my code was working, I saw the date of the RFC... Do you still have the code? It needn't go to waste -- this would make a fine addition to Python's easter egg basket! -- Greg

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 465: A dedicated infix operator for matrix multiplication

On Tue, Apr 08, 2014 at 06:49:13PM +0200, Antoine Pitrou wrote: > Le 08/04/2014 04:02, Steven D'Aprano a écrit : > > > >Many, many more people take part in the CPython core developer culture > >than just the core developers themselves. Look at the readership of this > >mailing list, which is open t

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 465: A dedicated infix operator for matrix multiplication

On Wed, Apr 9, 2014 at 2:49 AM, Antoine Pitrou wrote: > Le 08/04/2014 04:02, Steven D'Aprano a écrit : > >> >> Many, many more people take part in the CPython core developer culture >> than just the core developers themselves. Look at the readership of this >> mailing list, which is open to the pu

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 465: A dedicated infix operator for matrix multiplication

Le 08/04/2014 04:02, Steven D'Aprano a écrit : Many, many more people take part in the CPython core developer culture than just the core developers themselves. Look at the readership of this mailing list, which is open to the public and has regular posters who aren't core developers. In-jokes li

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 465: A dedicated infix operator for matrix multiplication

Ooooh...that stings. Victor Stinner wrote: >2014-04-08 3:04 GMT+02:00 Steven D'Aprano : >>> > >Python used to have an alias <> for != and I for one miss <> in >3.x. I >>> > >don't think TOOWTDI should be the last word in this debate. >>> > >>> > PEP 401 to the rescue: >>> >>> It occurs to me tha

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 465: A dedicated infix operator for matrix multiplication

On Tue, Apr 8, 2014 at 9:58 AM, Björn Lindqvist wrote: > 2014-04-07 3:41 GMT+02:00 Nathaniel Smith : >> So, I guess as far as I'm concerned, this is ready to go. Feedback welcome: >> http://legacy.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0465/ > > Couldn't you please have made your motivation example actually ru

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 465: A dedicated infix operator for matrix multiplication

On Apr 8, 2014 2:39 PM, "Nick Coghlan" wrote: > > On 8 April 2014 21:24, Björn Lindqvist wrote: > > 2014-04-08 12:23 GMT+02:00 Sturla Molden : > >> Björn Lindqvist wrote: > >> > >>> import numpy as np > >>> from numpy.linalg import inv, solve > >>> > >>> # Using dot function: > >>> S = np.dot((n

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 465: A dedicated infix operator for matrix multiplication

On 8 April 2014 21:24, Björn Lindqvist wrote: > 2014-04-08 12:23 GMT+02:00 Sturla Molden : >> Björn Lindqvist wrote: >> >>> import numpy as np >>> from numpy.linalg import inv, solve >>> >>> # Using dot function: >>> S = np.dot((np.dot(H, beta) - r).T, >>>np.dot(inv(np.dot(np.dot(H, V

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 465: A dedicated infix operator for matrix multiplication

On Tue, Apr 8, 2014 at 12:08 AM, Nick Coghlan wrote: > > On 7 Apr 2014 21:58, "MRAB" wrote: >> >> On 2014-04-08 02:45, Guido van Rossum wrote: >>> >>> So what? Aren't we allowed to have fun? :-) >>> >> Next thing you know, he'll be threatening people with The Comfy Chair! > > You may want to take

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 465: A dedicated infix operator for matrix multiplication

2014-04-08 12:23 GMT+02:00 Sturla Molden : > Björn Lindqvist wrote: > >> import numpy as np >> from numpy.linalg import inv, solve >> >> # Using dot function: >> S = np.dot((np.dot(H, beta) - r).T, >>np.dot(inv(np.dot(np.dot(H, V), H.T)), np.dot(H, beta) - r)) >> >> # Using dot method:

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 465: A dedicated infix operator for matrix multiplication

Björn Lindqvist wrote: > import numpy as np > from numpy.linalg import inv, solve > > # Using dot function: > S = np.dot((np.dot(H, beta) - r).T, >np.dot(inv(np.dot(np.dot(H, V), H.T)), np.dot(H, beta) - r)) > > # Using dot method: > S = (H.dot(beta) - r).T.dot(inv(H.dot(V).dot(H.T)

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 465: A dedicated infix operator for matrix multiplication

2014-04-07 3:41 GMT+02:00 Nathaniel Smith : > So, I guess as far as I'm concerned, this is ready to go. Feedback welcome: > http://legacy.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0465/ Couldn't you please have made your motivation example actually runnable? import numpy as np from numpy.linalg import inv, solve

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 465: A dedicated infix operator for matrix multiplication

2014-04-08 3:04 GMT+02:00 Steven D'Aprano : >> > >Python used to have an alias <> for != and I for one miss <> in 3.x. I >> > >don't think TOOWTDI should be the last word in this debate. >> > >> > PEP 401 to the rescue: >> >> It occurs to me that since that Aprils' Fools joke is many years old >>

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 465: A dedicated infix operator for matrix multiplication

On 7 Apr 2014 21:58, "MRAB" wrote: > > On 2014-04-08 02:45, Guido van Rossum wrote: >> >> So what? Aren't we allowed to have fun? :-) >> > Next thing you know, he'll be threatening people with The Comfy Chair! You may want to take a look at the packaging metadata 2.0 spec ;) I was also going to

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 465: A dedicated infix operator for matrix multiplication

On Tue, Apr 8, 2014 at 12:02 PM, Steven D'Aprano wrote: >> You can't be serious. > > I can't? Would it help if I sprinkle smileys and *winks* throughout my > post? You can be serious, Steven, but it's more likely to happen if you *don't* use smileys... *not very serious* ChrisA

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 465: A dedicated infix operator for matrix multiplication

On Mon, Apr 07, 2014 at 06:06:17PM -0700, Benjamin Peterson wrote: > On Mon, Apr 7, 2014, at 18:04, Steven D'Aprano wrote: > > On Mon, Apr 07, 2014 at 03:04:18PM -0700, Benjamin Peterson wrote: > > > On Mon, Apr 7, 2014, at 14:58, Barry Warsaw wrote: > > > > On Apr 07, 2014, at 05:47 PM, Alexander

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 465: A dedicated infix operator for matrix multiplication

On 2014-04-08 02:45, Guido van Rossum wrote: So what? Aren't we allowed to have fun? :-) Next thing you know, he'll be threatening people with The Comfy Chair! On Mon, Apr 7, 2014 at 6:06 PM, Benjamin Peterson mailto:benja...@python.org>> wrote: On Mon, Apr 7, 2014, at 18:04, Steven D'Ap

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 465: A dedicated infix operator for matrix multiplication

So what? Aren't we allowed to have fun? :-) On Mon, Apr 7, 2014 at 6:06 PM, Benjamin Peterson wrote: > On Mon, Apr 7, 2014, at 18:04, Steven D'Aprano wrote: > > On Mon, Apr 07, 2014 at 03:04:18PM -0700, Benjamin Peterson wrote: > > > On Mon, Apr 7, 2014, at 14:58, Barry Warsaw wrote: > > > > On

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 465: A dedicated infix operator for matrix multiplication

On Apr 07, 2014, at 06:06 PM, Benjamin Peterson wrote: >> > It occurs to me that since that Aprils' Fools joke is many years old >> > now, we should remove it. >> >> -1 on removal. > >You can't be serious. Hey man, don't break all my code! -Barry __

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 465: A dedicated infix operator for matrix multiplication

On Mon, Apr 7, 2014, at 18:04, Steven D'Aprano wrote: > On Mon, Apr 07, 2014 at 03:04:18PM -0700, Benjamin Peterson wrote: > > On Mon, Apr 7, 2014, at 14:58, Barry Warsaw wrote: > > > On Apr 07, 2014, at 05:47 PM, Alexander Belopolsky wrote: > > > > > > >Python used to have an alias <> for != and

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 465: A dedicated infix operator for matrix multiplication

On Mon, Apr 07, 2014 at 03:04:18PM -0700, Benjamin Peterson wrote: > On Mon, Apr 7, 2014, at 14:58, Barry Warsaw wrote: > > On Apr 07, 2014, at 05:47 PM, Alexander Belopolsky wrote: > > > > >Python used to have an alias <> for != and I for one miss <> in 3.x. I > > >don't think TOOWTDI should be

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 465: A dedicated infix operator for matrix multiplication

Alexander Belopolsky wrote: We can start by reviewing the reasons for having separate PyNumber/PySequence/PyMappingMethods structures. I believe that one of the reasons is that many types need to allocate only one of the three. That much is probably true. Numpy arrays, IIRC, allocate all th

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 465: A dedicated infix operator for matrix multiplication

I'm now accepting the PEP, so you all can stop joking around. On Mon, Apr 7, 2014 at 3:37 PM, Larry Hastings wrote: > > On 04/07/2014 03:16 PM, Alexander Belopolsky wrote: > > > On Mon, Apr 7, 2014 at 5:58 PM, Larry Hastings wrote: > >> I am -1**3001 on adding redundant non-ASCII operators to

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 465: A dedicated infix operator for matrix multiplication

On 04/07/2014 03:16 PM, Alexander Belopolsky wrote: On Mon, Apr 7, 2014 at 5:58 PM, Larry Hastings > wrote: I am -1**3001 on adding redundant non-ASCII operators to the language. >>> -1**3001 -1 :-) http://www.quickmeme.com/img/9c/9cb11f91cfda4d161c44e5b2c1

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 465: A dedicated infix operator for matrix multiplication

On Mon, Apr 7, 2014 at 5:58 PM, Larry Hastings wrote: > I am -1**3001 on adding redundant non-ASCII operators to the language. >>> -1**3001 -1 :-) ___ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev U

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 465: A dedicated infix operator for matrix multiplication

On Mon, Apr 7, 2014, at 14:58, Barry Warsaw wrote: > On Apr 07, 2014, at 05:47 PM, Alexander Belopolsky wrote: > > >Python used to have an alias <> for != and I for one miss <> in 3.x. I > >don't think TOOWTDI should be the last word in this debate. > > PEP 401 to the rescue: It occurs to me th

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 465: A dedicated infix operator for matrix multiplication

On Apr 07, 2014, at 05:47 PM, Alexander Belopolsky wrote: >Python used to have an alias <> for != and I for one miss <> in 3.x. I >don't think TOOWTDI should be the last word in this debate. PEP 401 to the rescue: % python3 Python 3.4.0 (default, Mar 22 2014, 22:51:25) [GCC 4.8.2] on linux Typ

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 465: A dedicated infix operator for matrix multiplication

On 04/07/2014 02:47 PM, Alexander Belopolsky wrote: On Mon, Apr 7, 2014 at 5:03 PM, Nathaniel Smith > wrote: > It would be nice to support A × B too, because it's much more > readable. You can configure a keyword to write arbitrary characters. > For example,

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 465: A dedicated infix operator for matrix multiplication

On Mon, Apr 7, 2014 at 5:03 PM, Nathaniel Smith wrote: > > It would be nice to support A × B too, because it's much more > > readable. You can configure a keyword to write arbitrary characters. > > For example, on Linux you can write × using "Compose x x" if you > > configured the Compose key. Or

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 465: A dedicated infix operator for matrix multiplication

On Mon, Apr 7, 2014 at 5:03 PM, Nathaniel Smith wrote: > no-one uses the pip -r requirements.txt system for > deployment... > I must be among "no-one" then. :-) Yet my systems don't leave much of a footprint on PyPI because we use PIP_DOWNLOAD_CACHE and internal PyPI mirrors. ___

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 465: A dedicated infix operator for matrix multiplication

On 04/07/2014 01:38 PM, Victor Stinner wrote: I'm not sure that it's a good thing to modify the *language* for a specific domain. But you can do a lot without modify the language :-) That ship has already sailed. Features have already been added at the behest of the numerical community. --

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 465: A dedicated infix operator for matrix multiplication

On Mon, Apr 7, 2014, at 14:33, Alexander Belopolsky wrote: > On Mon, Apr 7, 2014 at 5:23 PM, Benjamin Peterson > wrote: > > > I can understand why creating new array types is good fun, but how is > > creating a new struct helpful? > > > > We can start by reviewing the reasons for having separat

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 465: A dedicated infix operator for matrix multiplication

On Mon, Apr 7, 2014 at 5:23 PM, Benjamin Peterson wrote: > I can understand why creating new array types is good fun, but how is > creating a new struct helpful? > We can start by reviewing the reasons for having separate PyNumber/PySequence/PyMappingMethods structures. I believe that one of the

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 465: A dedicated infix operator for matrix multiplication

On Mon, Apr 7, 2014, at 14:22, Alexander Belopolsky wrote: > On Mon, Apr 7, 2014 at 1:11 PM, Benjamin Peterson > wrote: > > > > > We can populate that struct with array-specific alternatives for > > > PySequence/PyMappingMethods and eliminate the need for dynamically > > > created array types to

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 465: A dedicated infix operator for matrix multiplication

On Mon, Apr 7, 2014 at 1:11 PM, Benjamin Peterson wrote: > > > We can populate that struct with array-specific alternatives for > > PySequence/PyMappingMethods and eliminate the need for dynamically > > created array types to allocate those. > > Why would we want to do that? I assume "that" means

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 465: A dedicated infix operator for matrix multiplication

On Mon, Apr 7, 2014 at 9:38 PM, Victor Stinner wrote: > Hi, > > 2014-04-07 3:41 GMT+02:00 Nathaniel Smith : >> So, I guess as far as I'm concerned, this is ready to go. Feedback welcome: >> http://legacy.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0465/ > > I'm not convinced yet that there is enough usage of Python

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 465: A dedicated infix operator for matrix multiplication

On Mon, Apr 7, 2014 at 4:55 PM, Victor Stinner wrote: > I proposed to support both syntaxes, so you can write "@" if you are > unable to write ×. > It won't be obvious for the readers of the code whether × stands for @ or for *. Both * and @ are ASCII approximations to proper mathematical typeset

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 465: A dedicated infix operator for matrix multiplication

2014-04-07 22:46 GMT+02:00 Antoine Pitrou : > Le 07/04/2014 22:38, Victor Stinner a écrit : >> It would be nice to support A × B too, because it's much more >> readable. You can configure a keyword to write arbitrary characters. > > Well, IMHO Python code should be writable without having to "confi

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 465: A dedicated infix operator for matrix multiplication

Le 07/04/2014 22:38, Victor Stinner a écrit : It would be nice to support A × B too, because it's much more readable. You can configure a keyword to write arbitrary characters. Well, IMHO Python code should be writable without having to "configure your keyboard". Regards Antoine. ___

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 465: A dedicated infix operator for matrix multiplication

Hi, 2014-04-07 3:41 GMT+02:00 Nathaniel Smith : > So, I guess as far as I'm concerned, this is ready to go. Feedback welcome: > http://legacy.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0465/ I'm not convinced yet that there is enough usage of Python in mathematical world to modify the Python language to add a new

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 465: A dedicated infix operator for matrix multiplication

On Mon, Apr 7, 2014 at 7:54 PM, francis wrote: > >> >> So, I guess as far as I'm concerned, this is ready to go. Feedback > welcome: >> http://legacy.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0465/ >> > > Hi, > just curiosity: why is the second parameter 'o2' in: > > PyObject* PyObject_MatrixMultiply(PyObject *o1

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 465: A dedicated infix operator for matrix multiplication

On 2014-04-07 19:54, francis wrote: So, I guess as far as I'm concerned, this is ready to go. Feedback welcome: http://legacy.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0465/ Hi, just curiosity: why is the second parameter 'o2' in: PyObject* PyObject_MatrixMultiply(PyObject *o1, PyObject o2) not a poin

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 465: A dedicated infix operator for matrix multiplication

> > So, I guess as far as I'm concerned, this is ready to go. Feedback welcome: > http://legacy.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0465/ > Hi, just curiosity: why is the second parameter 'o2' in: PyObject* PyObject_MatrixMultiply(PyObject *o1, PyObject o2) not a pointer to PyObject? Thanks in advance!

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 465: A dedicated infix operator for matrix multiplication

On Mon, Apr 7, 2014, at 9:52, Alexander Belopolsky wrote: > On Sun, Apr 6, 2014 at 11:13 PM, Benjamin Peterson > wrote: > > > > I believe this leaves only one open question, which is where exactly > > > to stick the new matmul slots into PyTypeObject. This is the kind of > > > fiddly detail that

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 465: A dedicated infix operator for matrix multiplication

On Sun, Apr 6, 2014 at 11:13 PM, Benjamin Peterson wrote: > > I believe this leaves only one open question, which is where exactly > > to stick the new matmul slots into PyTypeObject. This is the kind of > > fiddly detail that can easily be settled later if the PEP is accepted, > > though. > > I d

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 465: A dedicated infix operator for matrix multiplication

On Sun, Apr 6, 2014, at 18:41, Nathaniel Smith wrote: > Hi all, > > I've just finished updating PEP 465 with resolutions to the various > issues that were raised during the python-ideas thread about it. (The > main changes since that thread are that @@ has been removed, and we > now definitely pro