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

(Latin Tokenizer) Add flexibility and finetuning power over enclitics handling #972

Merged
merged 5 commits into from Mar 11, 2020

Conversation

@PonteIneptique
Copy link
Member

PonteIneptique commented Feb 24, 2020

This is another step to the previous Pull Requests #970 for the issue #969 .
Unlike #969 which is an update to the data used for exceptions, this proposes a way to let users finetune the handlings of enclitics without having to change the source code of CLTK nor to do PR.

This does not prevent contributing but I feel like this would allow users like me to be less dependent on the @cltk/maintainers team, and limit the possibility of seeing user do one PR per token they find, and as such, overflow even more the volunteer and unpaid maintainers :)

I think this might be for @diyclassics to review.

@codecov-io

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

codecov-io commented Feb 24, 2020

Codecov Report

Merging #972 into master will decrease coverage by <.01%.
The diff coverage is 100%.

Impacted file tree graph

@@            Coverage Diff            @@
##           master    #972      +/-   ##
=========================================
- Coverage   89.81%   89.8%   -0.01%     
=========================================
  Files         223     223              
  Lines       14320   14316       -4     
=========================================
- Hits        12861   12857       -4     
  Misses       1459    1459
Impacted Files Coverage Δ
cltk/tokenize/latin/word.py 93.93% <100%> (ø) ⬆️
cltk/tokenize/latin_exceptions.py 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 3ffd04c...565ca06. Read the comment docs.

@kylepjohnson

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

kylepjohnson commented Mar 6, 2020

Very thoughtful @PonteIneptique . I am looking at all 3 of your PRs now.

@kylepjohnson

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

kylepjohnson commented Mar 11, 2020

I like it thank you

@kylepjohnson

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

kylepjohnson commented Mar 11, 2020

Same breakage as I commented in #970 (comment)

Otherwise ready to pull.

kylepjohnson added a commit that referenced this pull request Mar 11, 2020
kylepjohnson added a commit that referenced this pull request Mar 11, 2020
Bump vers
Actually merge #972
@kylepjohnson kylepjohnson merged commit 9b3e343 into cltk:master Mar 11, 2020
1 check was pending
1 check was pending
continuous-integration/travis-ci/pr The Travis CI build is in progress
Details
kylepjohnson added a commit that referenced this pull request Mar 11, 2020
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Linked issues

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

3 participants
You can’t perform that action at this time.