Re: [Python-Dev] [Python-checkins] cpython (3.3): minor docfix (reported at [email protected]) trace.py argument is --count not
On Sun, Apr 6, 2014, at 11:01, senthil.kumaran wrote: > http://hg.python.org/cpython/rev/b49d990aaa9d > changeset: 90160:b49d990aaa9d > branch: 3.3 > parent: 90130:63e6afd3ff1f > user:Senthil Kumaran > date:Sun Apr 06 10:59:47 2014 -0700 > summary: > minor docfix (reported at [email protected]) trace.py argument is --count > not --counts This change is of course not harmful, but remember that 3.3 is in security-fix only mode. ___ Python-Dev mailing list [email protected] https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
[Python-Dev] PEP 465: A dedicated infix operator for matrix multiplication
Hi all, I've just finished updating PEP 465 with resolutions to the various issues that were raised during the python-ideas thread about it. (The main changes since that thread are that @@ has been removed, and we now definitely propose that @ have the same precedence and associativity as *.) I believe this leaves only one open question, which is where exactly to stick the new matmul slots into PyTypeObject. This is the kind of fiddly detail that can easily be settled later if the PEP is accepted, though. So, I guess as far as I'm concerned, this is ready to go. Feedback welcome: http://legacy.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0465/ -n -- Nathaniel J. Smith Postdoctoral researcher - Informatics - University of Edinburgh http://vorpus.org ___ Python-Dev mailing list [email protected] https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 465: A dedicated infix operator for matrix multiplication
On Sun, Apr 6, 2014, at 18:41, Nathaniel Smith wrote: > Hi all, > > I've just finished updating PEP 465 with resolutions to the various > issues that were raised during the python-ideas thread about it. (The > main changes since that thread are that @@ has been removed, and we > now definitely propose that @ have the same precedence and > associativity as *.) > > I believe this leaves only one open question, which is where exactly > to stick the new matmul slots into PyTypeObject. This is the kind of > fiddly detail that can easily be settled later if the PEP is accepted, > though. I don't see what it shouldn't be in PyNumberMethods. Surely, we're not going to get a flood of requests for more matrix operators, are we? :) ___ Python-Dev mailing list [email protected] https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
