Front page | perl.perl6.language |
Postings from January 2004
> -----Original Message----- > From: Larry Wall [mailto:larry@wall.org] > Sent: Thursday, January 22, 2004 12:39 PM > To: Language List > Subject: Re: Semantics of vector operations > > > On Thu, Jan 22, 2004 at 03:53:04AM +0100, A. Pagaltzis wrote: > : Good point; however, this means different way to think of the > : vector ops than we had so far. Basically, we're moving from the > : realm of vector ops to that of vectorized operands. > : > : In light of this, I think Austin's proposal of marking the > : operands as vectorized makes a lot of sense. It was an unexpected > : that had me taken aback for a moment, but I like it more the more > : I think about it. It *feels* right to emphasize vectorization as > : something that happens to an operand, rather than something > : that's a property of the operation. > > I think some people will want to think of it one way, while others > will want to think of it the other way. If that's the case, the > proper place to put the marker is between the operand and the operator. > How do you handle operator precedence/associativity? That is, $a + $b + $c If you're going to vectorize, and combine, then you'll want to group. I think making the vectorizer a grouper as well kills two birds with one stone. $a + >>$b + $c<< vs. $a +<< ($b + $c) > You might argue that we should force people to think of it one way or > the other. But there's a reason that some people will think of it > one way while others will think of it the other way--I'd argue that > vectorization is not something that happens to *either* the operand > or the operator. Vectorization is a different *relationship* between > the operator and the operand. As such, I still think it belongs > between. > > Plus, in the symmetrical case, it *looks* symmetrical. Marking the > args in front makes everything look asymmetrical whether it is or not. Just a refresher, what *exactly* does vectorization do, again? I think of it as smart list-plus-times behavior, but when we go into matrix arithmetic, that doesn't hold up. Luke? =AustinThread Previous | Thread Next