On 03/14/2014 04:48 AM, M.-A. Lemburg wrote:
On 14.03.2014 12:25, Robert Kern wrote:
RSR = R.dot(var_beta.dot(R.T)) RSR = R @ var_beta @ R.T
xx_inv.dot(xeps.dot(xx_inv)) xx_inv @ xeps @ xx_inv
dF2lower_dper.dot(F2lower.T) + F2lower.dot(dF2lower_dper.T) - 4/period*F2lower.dot(F2lower.T) dF2lower_dper @ F2lower.T + F2lower @ dF2lower_dper.T - 4/period*(F2lower @ F2lower.T)
dFX_dper.dot(Gi.dot(FX2.T)) - FX.dot(Gi.dot(dG_dper.dot(Gi.dot(FX2.T)))) + FX.dot(Gi.dot(dFX2_dper.T)) (dFX_dper @ Gi @ FX2.T) - (FX @ Gi @ dG_dper @ Gi @ FX2.T) + (FX @ G @ dFX2_dper.T)
torient_inv.dot(tdof).dot(torient).dot(self.vertices[parent].meta['key'])) (((torient_inv @ tdof) @ torient) @ self.vertices[parent].meta['key']
This doesn't look very readable to me - the operator saves you a few parens in some situations, but as in the last example, it can also require adding new ones.
The difference being that grouping parens are easier to read and are less visual clutter than calling parens. -- ~Ethan~