Sebastien Loisel wrote: > Dear Raymond, > > Thank you for your email. > >> I think much of this thread is a repeat of conversations >> that were held for PEP 225: >> http://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0225/ >> >> That PEP is marked as deferred. Maybe it's time to >> bring it back to life. > > This is a much better PEP than the one I had found, and would solve > all of the numpy problems. The PEP is very well thought-out. A very interesting read! I wouldn't support some of the more exotic elements tacked on to the end (particularly the replacement of the now thoroughly entrenched bitwise operators), but the basic idea of providing ~op variants of several operators seems fairly sound. I'd be somewhat inclined to add ~not, ~and and ~or to the list even though that would pretty much force the semantics to be elementwise for the ~ variants (since the standard not, and and or are always objectwise and without PEP 335 there's no way for an object to change that). Cheers, Nick.
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