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
Improve Link interface #4250
Comments
This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. It will be closed after 30 days if no further activity occurs. Thank you for your contributions. |
One difference between
|
This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. It will be closed after 30 days if no further activity occurs. Thank you for your contributions. |
This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. It will be closed after 30 days if no further activity occurs. Thank you for your contributions. |
This issue is closed as announced. Feel free to re-open it if needed. |
This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. It will be closed after 30 days if no further activity occurs. Thank you for your contributions. |
This issue is closed as announced. Feel free to re-open it if needed. |
I'm thinking about improving the interface and class organization of Link as follows.
__init__
: init will accept both parameters, tuple of shape/dtype of parameters, and links). Child/parameter initializations via__init__
,add_link
, andadd_param
will be de-deprecated (they will be served for the official support of container-style usage of link, together with the next bullet point).L.Classifier
without introducingpredictor/
to the link paths.1 and 2 are relevant to #4106, while 3 is relevant to #2575. These changes will improve the simplicity and flexibility of Link interface, which is made more Pythonic.
I think these changes can be made without breaking most of the compatibility. Unification part of 1 has already been done at my local branch: https://github.com/beam2d/chainer/tree/unify-link-chain. If this direction is acceptable, I will make a PR for it and continue working on other parts.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: