[Python-ideas] Is there a good reason to use * for multiplication?
ubershmekel at gmail.com
Sat Oct 13 11:15:10 CEST 2012
On Sat, Oct 13, 2012 at 10:18 AM, Steven D'Aprano <steve at pearwood.info>wrote:
> but I think that puts the emphasis on the wrong thing. If (and that's a big
> if) we did something like this, it should be a pair of methods __op__ and
> the right-hand version __rop__ which get called on the *operands*, not the
> operator/function object:
> def __op__(self, other, symbol)
I thought the operator should have a say in how it operates, e.g. the
operater `dot` could call __dot__ in its operands.
def _dot(self, other):
return sum([i * j for i, j in zip(self, other)])
def __infix__(self, left, right):
return left._dot(left, right)
>>>Vector([1,2,3]) dot Vector([3,4,5])
Making the declaration and import of operators more explicit than the `def
__op__(self, other, symbol)` version. We could put [/, *, ., //, etc...] in
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Python-ideas