In these simple examples it's easy enough to ignore, but in more realistic code that I've seen it's impossible for me to follow until I invent arbitrary names for these operators.
But I think something else entirely. Usually I have a little picture in my head of what I feel the operator does or what it's properties are.
In this particular case I see/imagine a little purple bridge atop the operands that glows slightly and connects them.
I'd say use whatever feels natural to you: names, colors, shapes, smells(?), other feelings... Now I really wonder if there are people who read symbolic expressions by associating smells or taste.
Algebra classes are full of such operators, and usually my instructors were kind enough to give them names during lectures.
By looking at the screen. Do you have to ‘read’ a painting to be able to perceive it?
And then, if a painting is actually a 'riddle' that is intended to be taken as a message, then I really do want to decipher it in words. This happens in particular with religious icons (at least in Eastern Orthodoxy).
I feel we'll soon get into a discussion of whether reasoning is necessarily language-based or not, which I don't want to go into. So instead I will ask - how do you discuss that formula with someone else? How do you call that operator, or others like `<=>` when you're verbally discussing the algorithm/code with someone else?
- https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/%E2%8A%97
- https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/%E2%8A%99
So I'd read it as "the tensor product of a and b equals the dot product of a and b times b", something like that.
Or just "a times b = a prod f b" if I see this often.