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

Delete make_pipeline_from_components #2218

Merged
merged 9 commits into from May 3, 2021
Merged

Conversation

angela97lin
Copy link
Contributor

Closes #2173

@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented May 2, 2021

Codecov Report

Merging #2218 (06689da) into main (c77b6a1) will decrease coverage by 0.1%.
The diff coverage is 100.0%.

Impacted file tree graph

@@            Coverage Diff            @@
##             main    #2218     +/-   ##
=========================================
- Coverage   100.0%   100.0%   -0.0%     
=========================================
  Files         287      287             
  Lines       24451    24399     -52     
=========================================
- Hits        24433    24381     -52     
  Misses         18       18             
Impacted Files Coverage Δ
evalml/pipelines/utils.py 100.0% <100.0%> (ø)
evalml/tests/automl_tests/test_automl.py 99.7% <100.0%> (ø)
evalml/tests/automl_tests/test_engine_base.py 100.0% <100.0%> (ø)
evalml/tests/component_tests/test_components.py 100.0% <100.0%> (ø)
...omponent_tests/test_stacked_ensemble_classifier.py 100.0% <100.0%> (ø)
...component_tests/test_stacked_ensemble_regressor.py 100.0% <100.0%> (ø)
evalml/tests/component_tests/test_utils.py 100.0% <100.0%> (ø)
evalml/tests/conftest.py 100.0% <100.0%> (ø)
evalml/tests/pipeline_tests/test_pipeline_utils.py 100.0% <100.0%> (ø)

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update c77b6a1...06689da. Read the comment docs.

Copy link
Contributor

@freddyaboulton freddyaboulton left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Looks great @angela97lin ! I love the net deletion of lines hehe

@@ -144,46 +145,6 @@ def make_pipeline(X, y, estimator, problem_type, parameters=None, custom_hyperpa
return base_class(complete_component_graph, parameters=parameters, custom_hyperparameters=custom_hyperparameters)


def make_pipeline_from_components(component_instances, problem_type, custom_name=None, random_seed=0):
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I'm debating whether we should keep this around for another release and instead issue a deprecation warning in this pr.

I'm ok with deleting this util, I don't think it got a lot of traction from users but just noting that I think we use a different process for deleting functions/methods.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Interesting point, but I'm okay deleting immediately, since I think the main use of this was internal alignment :p Plus, it's not too difficult to do what make_pipeline_from_components with our new pipelines so not too much lost there!

comparison_pipeline = logistic_regression_multiclass_pipeline_class(parameters={"Logistic Regression Classifier": {"n_jobs": 1}})
objective = 'Log Loss Multiclass'
elif problem_type == ProblemTypes.REGRESSION:
X, y = X_y_regression
base_pipeline_class = RegressionPipeline
stacking_component_name = StackedEnsembleRegressor.name
input_pipelines = [make_pipeline_from_components([regressor], problem_type) for regressor in stackable_regressors]
input_pipelines = [base_pipeline_class([regressor]) for regressor in stackable_regressors]
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

nit-pick: I don't think there's a need for base_pipeline_class anymore.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Hmmm, I think we still need it for the line after (depending on which problem type, we create a specific pipeline class) but I'm okay with updating this line to just use RegressionPipeline so it's more clear! 😁

Copy link
Contributor

@bchen1116 bchen1116 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM! Agree with Freddy that it might be useful to deprecate before immediately removing from EvalML

@angela97lin angela97lin merged commit 838da3c into main May 3, 2021
@angela97lin angela97lin deleted the 2173_delete_make_pipeline branch May 3, 2021 20:15
This was referenced May 4, 2021
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Delete make_pipeline_from_components
3 participants