First draft, without feedback from others.
This commit is contained in:
parent
2a6b638168
commit
51000d4ad3
352
pep-0211.txt
352
pep-0211.txt
|
@ -1,11 +1,359 @@
|
||||||
PEP: 211
|
PEP: 211
|
||||||
Title: Adding New Operators to Python
|
Title: Adding New Linear Algebra Operators to Python
|
||||||
Version: $Revision$
|
Version: $Revision$
|
||||||
Owner: gvwilson@nevex.com (Greg Wilson)
|
Owner: gvwilson@nevex.com (Greg Wilson)
|
||||||
Python-Version: 2.1
|
Python-Version: 2.1
|
||||||
Status: Incomplete
|
Created: 15-Jul-2000
|
||||||
|
Status: Draft
|
||||||
|
Post-History:
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
Introduction
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
This PEP describes a proposal to add linear algebra operators to
|
||||||
|
Python 2.0. It discusses why such operators are desirable, and
|
||||||
|
alternatives that have been considered and discarded. This PEP
|
||||||
|
summarizes discussions held in mailing list forums, and provides
|
||||||
|
URLs for further information, where appropriate. The CVS revision
|
||||||
|
history of this file contains the definitive historical record.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
Proposal
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
Add a single new infix binary operator '@' ("across"), and
|
||||||
|
corresponding special methods "__across__()" and "__racross__()".
|
||||||
|
This operator will perform mathematical matrix multiplication on
|
||||||
|
NumPy arrays, and generate cross-products when applied to built-in
|
||||||
|
sequence types. No existing operator definitions will be changed.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
Background
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
Computers were invented to do arithmetic, as was the first
|
||||||
|
high-level programming language, Fortran. While Fortran was a
|
||||||
|
great advance on its machine-level predecessors, there was still a
|
||||||
|
very large gap between its syntax and the notation used by
|
||||||
|
mathematicians. The most influential effort to close this gap was
|
||||||
|
APL [1]:
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
The language [APL] was invented by Kenneth E. Iverson while at
|
||||||
|
Harvard University. The language, originally titled "Iverson
|
||||||
|
Notation", was designed to overcome the inherent ambiguities
|
||||||
|
and points of confusion found when dealing with standard
|
||||||
|
mathematical notation. It was later described in 1962 in a
|
||||||
|
book simply titled "A Programming Language" (hence APL).
|
||||||
|
Towards the end of the sixties, largely through the efforts of
|
||||||
|
IBM, the computer community gained its first exposure to
|
||||||
|
APL. Iverson received the Turing Award in 1980 for this work.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
APL's operators supported both familiar algebraic operations, such
|
||||||
|
as vector dot product and matrix multiplication, and a wide range
|
||||||
|
of structural operations, such as stitching vectors together to
|
||||||
|
create arrays. Its notation was exceptionally cryptic: many of
|
||||||
|
its symbols did not exist on standard keyboards, and expressions
|
||||||
|
had to be read right to left.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
Most subsequent work on numerical languages, such as Fortran-90,
|
||||||
|
MATLAB, and Mathematica, has tried to provide the power of APL
|
||||||
|
without the obscurity. Python's NumPy [2] has most of the
|
||||||
|
features that users of such languages expect, but these are
|
||||||
|
provided through named functions and methods, rather than
|
||||||
|
overloaded operators. This makes NumPy clumsier than its
|
||||||
|
competitors.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
One way to make NumPy more competitive is to provide greater
|
||||||
|
syntactic support in Python itself for linear algebra. This
|
||||||
|
proposal therefore examines the requirements that new linear
|
||||||
|
algebra operators in Python must satisfy, and proposes a syntax
|
||||||
|
and semantics for those operators.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
Requirements
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
The most important requirement is that there be minimal impact on
|
||||||
|
the existing definition of Python. The proposal must not break
|
||||||
|
existing programs, except possibly those that use NumPy.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
The second most important requirement is to be able to do both
|
||||||
|
elementwise and mathematical matrix multiplication using infix
|
||||||
|
notation. The nine cases that must be handled are:
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
|5 6| * 9 = |45 54| MS: matrix-scalar multiplication
|
||||||
|
|7 8| |63 72|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
9 * |5 6| = |45 54| SM: scalar-matrix multiplication
|
||||||
|
|7 8| |63 72|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
|2 3| * |4 5| = |8 15| VE: vector elementwise multiplication
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
|2 3| * |4| = 23 VD: vector dot product
|
||||||
|
|5|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
|2| * |4 5| = | 8 10| VO: vector outer product
|
||||||
|
|3| |12 15|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
|1 2| * |5 6| = | 5 12| ME: matrix elementwise multiplication
|
||||||
|
|3 4| |7 8| |21 32|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
|1 2| * |5 6| = |19 22| MM: mathematical matrix multiplication
|
||||||
|
|3 4| |7 8| |43 50|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
|1 2| * |5 6| = |19 22| VM: vector-matrix multiplication
|
||||||
|
|7 8|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
|5 6| * |1| = |17| MV: matrix-vector multiplication
|
||||||
|
|7 8| |2| |23|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
Note that 1-dimensional vectors are treated as rows in VM, as
|
||||||
|
columns in MV, and as both in VD and VO. Both are special cases
|
||||||
|
of 2-dimensional matrices (Nx1 and 1xN respectively). It may
|
||||||
|
therefore be reasonable to define the new operator only for
|
||||||
|
2-dimensional arrays, and provide an easy (and efficient) way for
|
||||||
|
users to convert 1-dimensional structures to 2-dimensional.
|
||||||
|
Behavior of a new multiplication operator for built-in types may
|
||||||
|
then:
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
(a) be a parsing error (possible only if a constant is one of the
|
||||||
|
arguments, since names are untyped in Python);
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
(b) generate a runtime error; or
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
(c) be derived by plausible extension from its behavior in the
|
||||||
|
two-dimensional case.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
Third, syntactic support should be considered for three other
|
||||||
|
operations:
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
T
|
||||||
|
(a) transposition: A => A[j, i] for A[i, j]
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
-1
|
||||||
|
(b) inverse: A => A' such that A' * A = I (the identity matrix)
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
(c) solution: A/b => x such that A * x = b
|
||||||
|
A\b => x such that x * A = b
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
With regard to (c), it is worth noting that the two syntaxes used
|
||||||
|
were invented by programmers, not mathematicians. Mathematicians
|
||||||
|
do not have a standard, widely-used notation for matrix solution.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
It is also worth noting that dozens of matrix inversion and
|
||||||
|
solution algorithms are widely used. MATLAB and its kin bind
|
||||||
|
their inversion and/or solution operators to one which is
|
||||||
|
reasonably robust in most cases, and require users to call
|
||||||
|
functions or methods to access others.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
Fourth, confusion between Python's notation and those of MATLAB
|
||||||
|
and Fortran-90 should be avoided. In particular, mathematical
|
||||||
|
matrix multiplication (case MM) should not be represented as '.*',
|
||||||
|
since:
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
(a) MATLAB uses prefix-'.' forms to mean 'elementwise', and raw
|
||||||
|
forms to mean "mathematical" [4]; and
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
(b) even if the Python parser can be taught how to handle dotted
|
||||||
|
forms, '1.*A' will still be visually ambiguous [4].
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
One anti-requirement is that new operators are not needed for
|
||||||
|
addition, subtraction, bitwise operations, and so on, since
|
||||||
|
mathematicians already treat them elementwise.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
Proposal:
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
The meanings of all existing operators will be unchanged. In
|
||||||
|
particular, 'A*B' will continue to be interpreted elementwise.
|
||||||
|
This takes care of the cases MS, SM, VE, and ME, and ensures
|
||||||
|
minimal impact on existing programs.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
A new operator '@' (pronounced "across") will be added to Python,
|
||||||
|
along with two special methods, "__across__()" and
|
||||||
|
"__racross__()", with the usual semantics.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
NumPy will overload "@" to perform mathematical multiplication of
|
||||||
|
arrays where shapes permit, and to throw an exception otherwise.
|
||||||
|
The matrix class's implementation of "@" will treat built-in
|
||||||
|
sequence types as if they were column vectors. This takes care of
|
||||||
|
the cases MM and MV.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
An attribute "T" will be added to the NumPy array type, such that
|
||||||
|
"m.T" is:
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
(a) the transpose of "m" for a 2-dimensional array
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
(b) the 1xN matrix transpose of "m" if "m" is a 1-dimensional
|
||||||
|
array; or
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
(c) a runtime error for an array with rank >= 3.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
This attribute will alias the memory of the base object. NumPy's
|
||||||
|
"transpose()" function will be extended to turn built-in sequence
|
||||||
|
types into row vectors. This takes care of the VM, VD, and VO
|
||||||
|
cases. We propose an attribute because:
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
(a) the resulting notation is similar to the 'superscript T' (at
|
||||||
|
least, as similar as ASCII allows), and
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
(b) it signals that the transposition aliases the original object.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
No new operators will be defined to mean "solve a set of linear
|
||||||
|
equations", or "invert a matrix". Instead, NumPy will define a
|
||||||
|
value "inv", which will be recognized by the exponentiation
|
||||||
|
operator, such that "A ** inv" is the inverse of "A". This is
|
||||||
|
similar in spirit to NumPy's existing "newaxis" value.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
(Optional) When applied to sequences, the operator will return a
|
||||||
|
list of tuples containing the cross-product of their elements in
|
||||||
|
left-to-right order:
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
>>> [1, 2] @ (3, 4)
|
||||||
|
[(1, 3), (1, 4), (2, 3), (2, 4)]
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
>>> [1, 2] @ (3, 4) @ (5, 6)
|
||||||
|
[(1, 3, 5), (1, 3, 6),
|
||||||
|
(1, 4, 5), (1, 4, 6),
|
||||||
|
(2, 3, 5), (2, 3, 6),
|
||||||
|
(2, 4, 5), (2, 4, 6)]
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
This will require the same kind of special support from the parser
|
||||||
|
as chained comparisons (such as "a<b<c<=d"). However, it would
|
||||||
|
permit the following:
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
>>> for (i, j) in [1, 2] @ [3, 4]:
|
||||||
|
>>> print i, j
|
||||||
|
1 3
|
||||||
|
1 4
|
||||||
|
2 3
|
||||||
|
2 4
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
as a short-hand for the common nested loop idiom:
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
>>> for i in [1, 2]:
|
||||||
|
>>> for j in [3, 4]:
|
||||||
|
>>> print i, j
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
Response to the 'lockstep loop' questionnaire [5] indicated that
|
||||||
|
newcomers would be comfortable with this (so comfortable, in fact,
|
||||||
|
that most of them interpreted most multi-loop 'zip' syntaxes [6]
|
||||||
|
as implementing single-stage nesting).
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
Alternatives:
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
01. Don't add new operators --- stick to functions and methods.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
Python is not primarily a numerical language. It is not worth
|
||||||
|
complexifying the language for this special case --- NumPy's
|
||||||
|
success is proof that users can and will use functions and methods
|
||||||
|
for linear algebra.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
On the positive side, this maintains Python's simplicity. Its
|
||||||
|
weakness is that support for real matrix multiplication (and, to a
|
||||||
|
lesser extent, other linear algebra operations) is frequently
|
||||||
|
requested, as functional forms are cumbersome for lengthy
|
||||||
|
formulas, and do not respect the operator precedence rules of
|
||||||
|
conventional mathematics. In addition, the method form is
|
||||||
|
asymmetric in its operands.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
02. Introduce prefixed forms of existing operators, such as "@*"
|
||||||
|
or "~*", or used boxed forms, such as "[*]" or "%*%".
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
There are (at least) three objections to this. First, either form
|
||||||
|
seems to imply that all operators exist in both forms. This is
|
||||||
|
more new entities than the problem merits, and would require the
|
||||||
|
addition of many new overloadable methods, such as __at_mul__.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
Second, while it is certainly possible to invent semantics for
|
||||||
|
these new operators for built-in types, this would be a case of
|
||||||
|
the tail wagging the dog, i.e. of letting the existence of a
|
||||||
|
feature "create" a need for it.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
Finally, the boxed forms make human parsing more complex, e.g.:
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
A[*] = B vs. A[:] = B
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
03. (From Moshe Zadka [7], and also considered by Huaiyu Zhou [8]
|
||||||
|
in his proposal [9]) Retain the existing meaning of all
|
||||||
|
operators, but create a behavioral accessor for arrays, such
|
||||||
|
that:
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
A * B
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
is elementwise multiplication (ME), but:
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
A.m() * B.m()
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
is mathematical multiplication (MM). The method "A.m()" would
|
||||||
|
return an object that aliased A's memory (for efficiency), but
|
||||||
|
which had a different implementation of __mul__().
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
The advantage of this method is that it has no effect on the
|
||||||
|
existing implementation of Python: changes are localized in the
|
||||||
|
Numeric module. The disadvantages are:
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
(a) The semantics of "A.m() * B", "A + B.m()", and so on would
|
||||||
|
have to be defined, and there is no "obvious" choice for them.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
(b) Aliasing objects to trigger different operator behavior feels
|
||||||
|
less Pythonic than either calling methods (as in the existing
|
||||||
|
Numeric module) or using a different operator. This PEP is
|
||||||
|
primarily about look and feel, and about making Python more
|
||||||
|
attractive to people who are not already using it.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
04. (From a proposal [9] by Huaiyu Zhou [8]) Introduce a "delayed
|
||||||
|
inverse" attribute, similar to the "transpose" attribute
|
||||||
|
advocated in the third part of this proposal. The expression
|
||||||
|
"a.I" would be a delayed handle on the inverse of the matrix
|
||||||
|
"a", which would be evaluated in context as required. For
|
||||||
|
example, "a.I * b" and "b * a.I" would solve sets of linear
|
||||||
|
equations, without actually calculating the inverse.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
The main drawback of this proposal it is reliance on lazy
|
||||||
|
evaluation, and even more on "smart" lazy evaluation (i.e. the
|
||||||
|
operation performed depends on the context in which the evaluation
|
||||||
|
is done). The BDFL has so far resisted introducing LE into
|
||||||
|
Python.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
Related Proposals
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
0203 : Augmented Assignments
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
If new operators for linear algebra are introduced, it may
|
||||||
|
make sense to introduce augmented assignment forms for
|
||||||
|
them.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
0207 : Rich Comparisons
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
It may become possible to overload comparison operators
|
||||||
|
such as '<' so that an expression such as 'A < B' returns
|
||||||
|
an array, rather than a scalar value.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
0209 : Adding Multidimensional Arrays
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
Multidimensional arrays are currently an extension to
|
||||||
|
Python, rather than a built-in type.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
Acknowledgments:
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
I am grateful to Huaiyu Zhu [8] for initiating this discussion,
|
||||||
|
and for some of the ideas and terminology included below.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
References:
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
[1] http://www.acm.org/sigapl/whyapl.htm
|
||||||
|
[2] http://numpy.sourceforge.net
|
||||||
|
[3] PEP-0203.txt "Augmented Assignments".
|
||||||
|
[4] http://bevo.che.wisc.edu/octave/doc/octave_9.html#SEC69
|
||||||
|
[5] http://www.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2000-July/013139.html
|
||||||
|
[6] PEP-0201.txt "Lockstep Iteration"
|
||||||
|
[7] Moshe Zadka is 'moshez@math.huji.ac.il'.
|
||||||
|
[8] Huaiyu Zhu is 'hzhu@users.sourceforge.net'
|
||||||
|
[9] http://www.python.org/pipermail/python-list/2000-August/112529.html
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
Local Variables:
|
Local Variables:
|
||||||
mode: indented-text
|
mode: indented-text
|
||||||
|
|
Loading…
Reference in New Issue