On Tuesday 01 February 2005 01:18 am, Markus Laire wrote:
> Luke Palmer writes:
> > Yeah, the sigils do get in the way for small placeholder variables like
> > these:
> > Â @C[ $i; $j; $k; $l ] = @A[ $i; $j ] * @B[ $k; $l ] Â
>...
> Would placeholder variables be used often enough to varrant th
Luke Palmer writes:
Craig DeForest writes:
Yeah, the sigils do get in the way for small placeholder variables like
these.
 @C[ $i; $j; $k; $l ] = @A[ $i; $j ] * @B[ $k; $l ] Â
Losing the carets doesn't do much for us (and would force us to use the
explicit syntax, whatever that might be). Hmm
Craig DeForest writes:
> Quoth Luke Palmer on Monday 31 January 2005 03:46 pm,
> > C_{ijkl} = A_{ij} * B_{kl}
> >
> > You write either of:
> >
> > Â @C[$^i; $^j; $^k; $^l] = @A[$^i; $^j] * @B[$^k; $^l] Â
> > @C = Â @A[$^i; $^j] * @B[$^k; $^l] Â
>
> Hmm... This is both insanely great an
Luke Palmer writes:
> Or to write another typical tensor product:
>
> a^j = L_i^j b^i
>
> You write either of:
>
> Â @a[$^j] = @L[$^i; $^j] * @b[$^i] Â
> @a = @L Â*Â @b;
Or not. There's that implicit Einstein summation involved, and a
general purpose programming language isn't abou
Quoth Luke Palmer on Monday 31 January 2005 03:46 pm,
> C_{ijkl} = A_{ij} * B_{kl}
>
> You write either of:
>
> Â @C[$^i; $^j; $^k; $^l] = @A[$^i; $^j] * @B[$^k; $^l] Â
> @C = Â @A[$^i; $^j] * @B[$^k; $^l] Â
Hmm... This is both insanely great and also greatly insane.
The issue is th
S09 states (in "Parallelized parameters and autothreading") that if you
use a parameter as an array subscript in a closure, the closure is a
candidate for autothreading.
-> $x, $y { @foo[$x;$y] }
Means:
-> ?$x = @foo.shape[0].range,
?$y = @foo.shape[1].range { @foo[$x;$y] }
And e
