Home - News ( United States | United Kingdom | Italy | Germany ) - Football scores

Showing content from http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2008-July/081519.html below:

[Python-Dev] Close PEP 211? (was Re: Infix operators)

• Previous message: [Python-Dev] Close PEP 211? (was Re: Infix operators)
• Next message: [Python-Dev] Infix operators
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

Terry Reedy wrote:

> Given that itertools.product(A,B) == ((x,y) for x in A for y in B)
> == the proposed 'A @ B' and given Guido's pronounced distaste for new 
> infix, should this be closed?

Would there likely be any support for an alternative
PEP defining @ as matrix multiplication in both Python
and numpy?

-- 
Greg

• Previous message: [Python-Dev] Close PEP 211? (was Re: Infix operators)
• Next message: [Python-Dev] Infix operators
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue

Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo

HTML: 3.2 | Encoding: UTF-8 | Version: 0.7.4