On Sat, Mar 15, 2014 at 4:40 PM, Charles R Harris <charlesr.har...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Sat, Mar 15, 2014 at 9:58 AM, Robert Kern <robert.k...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> On Sat, Mar 15, 2014 at 2:49 PM, Charles R Harris >> <charlesr.har...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > >> > I favor the weak right option. >> > >> > 1) Giving '*' higher precedence than `@` makes it easier, to my mind, to >> > parse out what is going to happen: all the element-wise multiplications, >> > followed by the matrix operations. I'd probably still use parenthesis >> > for >> > clarity. >> >> It seems to me that 'tight' gives the same benefit. Any reasoning for >> the preference of 'weak' over 'tight'? >> > > Two other reasons come to mind. First, '*' is right associative, so I think > it is nicer to first view the expression as parsed into blocks separated by > '@', which act somewhat like parenthesis at that point, and then evaluate > the blocks.
Again, I think tight does the same amount of separation, just with blocks of matrix multiplication broken up by elementwise multiplication; this is just an argument against 'same', not for 'weak' over 'tight'. As I mentioned elsewhere, my visual system seems to break things up with @-tight anyways. Does it not for you? > Second, and somewhat weaker, it might make it easier to track > how arrays are broadcast. I think this point is going to ultimately determine this, if we can break down all the cases and if they actually do favor one choice over another. -- Robert Kern _______________________________________________ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion