[Python-ideas] (no subject)

[Stephen J. Turnbull]

Ivan Levkivskyi writes:

 > Ok, I will try inspecting all existing approaches to find the one
 > that seems more "right" to me :)

If you do inspect all the approaches you can find, I hope you'll keep
notes and publish them, perhaps as a blog article.

 > In any case that approach could be updated by incorporating matrix
 > @ as a dedicated operator for compositions.

I think rather than "dedicated" you mean "suggested".  One of Andrew's
main points is that you're unlikely to find more than a small minority
agreeing on the "right" approach, no matter which one you choose.

 > At least, it seems that Erik from astropy likes this idea and it is
 > quite natural for people with "scientific" background.

Sure, but as he also points out, when you know that you're going to be
composing only functions of one argument, the Unix pipe symbol is also
quite natural (as is Haskell's operator-less notation).  While one of
my hobbies is category theory (basically, the mathematical theory of
composable maps for those not familiar with the term), I find the Unix
pipeline somehow easier to think about than abstract composition,
although I believe they're equivalent (at least as composition is
modeled by category theory).