Discussion: new operators for numerical computation

[Paul Magwene]

Tim Hochberg wrote:
> 
> Gregory Lielens <gregory.lielens at fft.be> writes:
> 
> > Tim Hochberg wrote:
> [...]
> > I like the parethese a lot! except for ° which is probably out of
> > question,
> > this is the prettier way to do it, but (alwas a but :-( )
> >
> > - the solve operator indeed...The only thing i can come with is the ugly
> > (%)
> >   or the pretty but out-of-question (\)
> 
> My favorite right now is |. So one would have:
> 
> A[*]B    # matouter
> A(*)B    # matinner
> A(/)B    # matdiv
> A(|)B    # matsolve
> A(^)B    # matpower
> 
> Alternatively, one could use:
> 
> A(*)B   # matouter
> A(.)B   # matinner (AKA dot, get it?)
> 
> That would cut down on the available symbols, but might make parsing
> easier? It might also be easier to distinguish between the two
> products.
> 
> I've left out other potential outer operators (outer sum, etc) and
> alternate inner products (Lie, Kroneker, ?) pending finding a
> constituency for them.

Kronecker products get used enough (at least in statistics) that I'd
hope we'd include 'em (we're already on our way down the slippery slope,
so I may as well lobby for operators *I* want ;-).

How about:

A{*}B   # matkron
 
(Paralleling A[*]B for matouter, and A(*)B for matinner)


-- 

Paul Magwene
paul.magwene at yale.edu