Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

fixed issues 61/62 #199

Open
wants to merge 2 commits into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from
Open

fixed issues 61/62 #199

wants to merge 2 commits into from

Conversation

sneha-desai
Copy link
Contributor

@sneha-desai sneha-desai commented Sep 27, 2019

closes #61 and closes #62

@rfratila rfratila added bug fix A stable patch for a previous bug enhancement New feature or request ReviewReady labels Sep 27, 2019
@@ -0,0 +1,77 @@
"""Simple Convolution and fully connected blocks example."""
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

since this is an example script - can you add some more inline comments about what the various sections do? would be easier to follow

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Just did!

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

that's a great start! but for each major block of code, we need comments so that you can be able to understand the entire flow of the example from just the inline docs. thanks!

for epoch in iterator:
for epoch in range(epochs):

logger.info('\n -------- Epoch: {} --------\n'.format(epoch))
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

why have this additional epoch log if the tqdm writer also writes the current epoch?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Because I don't use tqdm on the epoch level anymore

Copy link
Contributor Author

@sneha-desai sneha-desai Oct 1, 2019

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The problem was the overlapping progress bars, that's why i removed the epoch level one

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

please see my other comment about this. I don't think the solution for this is to remove the progress bar altogether. unless I'm missing something, we just need to clean up the nested progress bar implementation.

@@ -651,9 +652,11 @@ def fit(self, train_loader, val_loader, epochs,
else:
save_path = save_path + '/' + self.name + '_'
save_path = get_save_path(save_path, vis_type='train')
iterator = trange(epochs, desc='Epoch: ')
# iterator = trange(epochs, desc='Epoch: ')
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

doesn't this remove the progress bar at the epoch level?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The problem was the overlapping progress bars, that's why i removed the outer one

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

but you still need to print the epoch progress bar. Nested progress bars are what we are going for so they just need to be cleaned up in implementation.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
bug fix A stable patch for a previous bug enhancement New feature or request ReviewReady
Projects
None yet
2 participants