Discussion: Introducing new operators for matrix computation
Paul Prescod
paul at prescod.net
Mon Jul 17 19:10:06 EDT 2000
More information about the Python-list mailing list
Mon Jul 17 19:10:06 EDT 2000
- Previous message (by thread): Discussion: Introducing new operators for matrix computation
- Next message (by thread): IDLE startup error on NT4
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Gareth McCaughan wrote: > > ... > > Only if you implement matrices as lists of lists, in which > case operations like * and / won't work anyway. I was assuming > that (1) you have a special Matrix class, and (2) the machinery > for list comprehensions is flexible enough to let it express > other kinds of mapping. Today, the list comprehension syntax is syntactic sugar for a=[] for i in firstloop: for j in secondloop: ... a.append( i, j ) I don't see any easy way to guess what type you want as "output" so it has to default to a fixed type. You could of course do this: Matrix( [...] ) I would be curious about ideas for allowing the output object to be specified or inferred. What would the protocol be? -- Paul Prescod - Not encumbered by corporate consensus It's difficult to extract sense from strings, but they're the only communication coin we can count on. - http://www.cs.yale.edu/~perlis-alan/quotes.html
- Previous message (by thread): Discussion: Introducing new operators for matrix computation
- Next message (by thread): IDLE startup error on NT4
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the Python-list mailing list