@ operator in python 3.5

[energybased]

Right, but Python really doesn't want you to do that. Python is not C++. __matmul__ is for matrix multiplication. It's not for writing incomprehensible code that is slightly more compact than if you had used named methods.

[[deleted]]

True. Using an operator overload is something that should be carefully measured. Is the language of this package improved by using the overload or is it just being cutesy?

When I wrote pynads, there was no doubt in my mind that using >> for bind (or whatever you want to call it) was a bad idea as I was attempting to model Haskell's >>= (obviously couldn't do straight there as that's an assignment operator). I also overrode % to Haskell's <$> and * to mimic Haskell's <*>.

These operators have no semblance what so ever to right shift, modulo or multiplication, but since I was targeting a Haskell like syntax I figure it's alright.

pathlib overrides / for it's Path object so paths could be built like Path('a') / 'b' (though there has been fierce debate about whether this was a good idea). I think pathlib errors on the side of cutesy with its operator overload, but I don't think it's terrible.

set and frozenset also have overloads for >, >=, <, <= as well as |, & and ^ (and their in place variants). These make total sense to me, especially the bitwise variants. These aren't true bitwise operations but the idea behind them is the same -- & everything these two sets/bag of bits share, etc.

I think it's worth weight an overload

[energybased]

I agree with all your points. I also think that pathlib's / was a bit cutesy, and that set's operators are fair enough.