On Thu, 14 Sep 2006 18:49:13 -0700 Geoffrey Irving <irving@cs.stanford.edu> wrote:
On Fri, Sep 15, 2006 at 11:21:16AM +1000, Manfred Doudar wrote:
Same with inner_product. dot_product is way cooooler.
If your dot product is indeed an inner product, then an inner_product is what you should call your op - being explicit rather than suggestive is always better (, sorry, just that my mathematics grounding makes me speak out on this one).
Actually, dot_product is more specific, and therefore a better name:
Hmm, I knew that comment would get me into trouble; but was kind-of in two heads/minds when I wrote that - indeed a dot-product is more "specific", yes ... you are limited to operations of addition and multiplication with a dot-product (effectively a constraint on the kinds of spaces you are prepared to deal with), not so for its generalization. Cheers, -- Manfred Doudar - Research Engineer National ICT Australia - Canberra Research Lab | www.nicta.com.au Research School of Information Sciences and Engineering (RSISE) The Australian National University - Canberra, ACT 0200 AUSTRALIA