<instructions>Your goal is to analyze the following comment and estimate how highly it will be upvoted by the Hacker News community.</instructions><comment><author>jdimov9</author><text>&amp;quot;An upcoming release of NumPy 1.10 will add support for the new operator&amp;quot; [1]&lt;p&gt;[1] &lt;a href=&quot;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;docs.python.org&amp;#x2F;3.5&amp;#x2F;whatsnew&amp;#x2F;3.5.html&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;docs.python.org&amp;#x2F;3.5&amp;#x2F;whatsnew&amp;#x2F;3.5.html&lt;/a&gt;</text><parent_chain><item><author>vegabook</author><text>Agreed but does this apply in Numpy as well? Will Python matrix multiplications just work on lists of lists in which case they&amp;#x27;re much slower? Sorry just asking from a 2.7 holdout here as this might cause me to move.</text></item><item><author>gh02t</author><text>Heh, for me it&amp;#x27;s the matrix multiply operator. Such a minor addition will make for a pretty big improvement to my day-to-day coding experience.</text></item><item><author>ricw</author><text>By far the most exciting news here, to me, is PEP 484 typing module. Typing support would eliminate one of pythons biggest weaknesses. Furthermore, having it optional means it can remain as easy play and prototype with while becoming &amp;quot;more professional.&amp;quot;&lt;p&gt;The other features are all well rounded, with co-routines having quite some potential, though I&amp;#x27;d have to play around with them first to assess.&lt;p&gt;Now if everything would please start moving on to Python 3 pretty please ;).</text></item></parent_chain></comment><story><title>Python 3.5.0</title><url>https://www.python.org/downloads/release/python-350/</url></story>
<instructions>Your goal is to analyze the following comment and estimate how highly it will be upvoted by the Hacker News community.</instructions><comment><author>jwandborg</author><text>The matrix multiplication operator is not implemented for any standard python data type.&lt;p&gt;The matrix multiplication PEP is actually titled &amp;quot;A dedicated infix operator for matrix multiplication&amp;quot;, and that&amp;#x27;s (broadly) the &lt;i&gt;only&lt;/i&gt; thing that it provides. Here&amp;#x27;s the arguments for &lt;i&gt;why&lt;/i&gt; the operator should exist: &lt;a href=&quot;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;www.python.org&amp;#x2F;dev&amp;#x2F;peps&amp;#x2F;pep-0465&amp;#x2F;#why-should-matrix-multiplication-be-infix&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;www.python.org&amp;#x2F;dev&amp;#x2F;peps&amp;#x2F;pep-0465&amp;#x2F;#why-should-matrix-...&lt;/a&gt;&lt;p&gt;numpy and other libraries might&amp;#x2F;has&amp;#x2F;will implement the matrix multiplication infix operator for their array and matrix data types.</text><parent_chain><item><author>vegabook</author><text>Agreed but does this apply in Numpy as well? Will Python matrix multiplications just work on lists of lists in which case they&amp;#x27;re much slower? Sorry just asking from a 2.7 holdout here as this might cause me to move.</text></item><item><author>gh02t</author><text>Heh, for me it&amp;#x27;s the matrix multiply operator. Such a minor addition will make for a pretty big improvement to my day-to-day coding experience.</text></item><item><author>ricw</author><text>By far the most exciting news here, to me, is PEP 484 typing module. Typing support would eliminate one of pythons biggest weaknesses. Furthermore, having it optional means it can remain as easy play and prototype with while becoming &amp;quot;more professional.&amp;quot;&lt;p&gt;The other features are all well rounded, with co-routines having quite some potential, though I&amp;#x27;d have to play around with them first to assess.&lt;p&gt;Now if everything would please start moving on to Python 3 pretty please ;).</text></item></parent_chain></comment><story><title>Python 3.5.0</title><url>https://www.python.org/downloads/release/python-350/</url></story>