[chewxy]

Nice. I can roughly understand it though I don't quite understand why inner product has a transpose in it (assuming you use are using the symbols per APL).

Check my understanding: IP = distribute `+` across an application of `*` across all transposed elements.

If your vectors/arrays are just arrays and column/row vectors are shape conventions then there is no need for transposition. Right? Unless you have some sort of checks for shapes

[japiirainen]

Hi, yeah you assumes right that the transpose symbol comes from APL!

This language does not have ”implicit iteration” a la APL, thus * is just a binary operation you can apply like this *:<1,2> which will yield 3. This is why inner product needs to first transpose. TBH I don’t like this, I just wanted to follow the specification given in the paper as closely as possible. I might diverge from this and implement ”implicit iteration” in the future!

[chewxy]

Backus' paper had a specification. TIL.

Must be a weird award speech to give.

Thanks for the explanation. It's now very clear

[Jtsummers]

Turing Award lectures are not acceptance speeches in the normal sense. They've been technical lectures since the start related to the primary work/interest of the individual receiving the award.

https://amturing.acm.org/alphabetical.cfm - You can find the lectures linked from the individual's name. The length varies significantly.