Re: Ideas for auto BSX

[Jordi Gutiérrez Hermoso]

On 1 October 2011 05:51, Dr. Alexander Klein
<address@hidden> wrote:
> Am 30.09.2011 um 23:18 schrieb fork:
>
>> Jordi Gutiérrez Hermoso <jordigh <at> gmail.com> writes:
>>>
>>> So, while I think this is quite useful, it should by no means be
>>> called "-" in my opinion. Perhaps ".-" would do? I've never seen
>>> anyone use this.
>>
>> I think making the .-, .*, etc "broadcastable", and keeping -, *, etc with 
>> their
>> standard linear algebra interpretations, makes the most sense.
>
> Good morning,

Salaam.

> I've yet another idea based on Kronecker algebra!
>
> Why not introduce five new two-character infix operators, like for
> example $+, $-, $*, $/, $^, or whatever instead of $ fits in the
> first position?

I would like to avoid introducing more obscure notation. Obscure
notation was why I implemented this feature in the first place. Auto
BSX is simply that -- more convenient notation.

Do you think most users of numpy are horribly confused by what numpy
calls broadcasting? Do you think this is a reason to avoid numpy? It
seems to work for them and its users seem to love it. Do you think
people bring different expectations to Octave and would thus hate BSX?

- Jordi G. H.