<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>Named Tensor Notation · HackerPapers discussions</title><link>https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/2102.13196/</link><description>Collected HN comments and submissions linking this paper.</description><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Mon, 02 Nov 2026 11:16:22 GMT</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/2102.13196/feed.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" /><item><title>Named Tensor Notation — mentioned by taliesinb</title><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40183379</link><guid isPermaLink="false">urn:hackerpapers:mention:2102.13196:40183379</guid><pubDate>Sat, 27 Apr 2024 20:48:29 GMT</pubDate><description>&lt;p&gt;While I applaud the OP&amp;#x27;s exposition, imagine that instead of having axis names live as single-letter variables within einsum, our arrays themselves had these names attached to their axes? It&amp;#x27;s almost like when we moved from writing machine code to structured programming: instead of being content to document that certain registers corresponding to certain semantically meaningful quantities at particular times during program execution, we manipulated only named variables and left compilers to figure out how to allocate these to registers? We&amp;#x27;re at that point now with array programming.…&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/2102.13196/"&gt;Paper and discussion history&lt;/a&gt;. A mention is not an endorsement.&lt;/p&gt;</description><category>cs.LG</category></item></channel></rss>
