On Fri, Mar 14, 2014 at 8:15 PM, Nick Coghlan <ncoghlan@gmail.com> wrote:
A few other miscellaneous comments:
- nice work on the PEP Nathaniel!
Thanks!
- as with others, "@" as the operator doesn't thrill me, but I also think it crosses the threshold of "good enough given the constraints" - the PEP should probably recommend adding an "operator.matmul" function, a "PyObject_MatrixMultiply" C API and consider whether or not the new special method should be given a C level type slot.
operator.matmul and PyObject_MatrixMultiply are obvious enough, but I'm afraid I'm not too clear on the tradeoffs about adding a C level type slot, or even entirely sure what the alternative is. (I guess I just assumed that all special methods used C level type slots and there was nothing to think about.) Do you (or anyone) have any thoughts? -- Nathaniel J. Smith Postdoctoral researcher - Informatics - University of Edinburgh http://vorpus.org