fix add_config func is not called bug

[shenmishajing]

Motivation

The add_config func of visualizer is not called, so all vis_backends will not get the configs.
call self.visualizer.add_config(self.cfg) after create visualizer.

The add_config func of wandb is wrong, see https://docs.wandb.ai/guides/track/config
wandb add_config by wandb.config.update(<a dict object here>) instead of wandb.save()

In addition, wandb can log all codes to reproduce experiments, I add this feature in add_config func.

Modification

call self.visualizer.add_config(self.cfg) after create visualizer.
fix wandb add_config bug by wandb.config.update(<a dict object here>) instead of wandb.save()
add wandb log_code feature

Use cases (Optional)

set the log_code_name of WandbVisBackend to named code artifacts.

Checklist

1. The modification is covered by complete unit tests. If not, please add more unit test to ensure the correctness.
2. The documentation has been modified accordingly, like docstring or example tutorials.

[zhouzaida]

Hi @shenmishajing , thanks for your contribution. It would make the code more robust if unit tests are added for those modifications.

[shenmishajing]

@zhouzaida How about this? I add a registry name PATH_FILTERS to specific the include_fn and exclude_fn.

[zhouzaida]

Sorry, I may have misrepresented it, what I was trying to say was that you could follow your previous solution and not support include_func and exclude_func.

[shenmishajing]

Sorry, I may have misrepresented it, what I was trying to say was that you could follow your previous solution and not support include_func and exclude_func.

@zhouzaida Oh……I'm sorry I ignore the no need's no in your comment. So, should I roll it back?

[zhouzaida]

Sorry, I may have misrepresented it, what I was trying to say was that you could follow your previous solution and not support include_func and exclude_func.

@zhouzaida Oh……I'm sorry I ignore the no need's no in your comment. So, should I roll it back?

Suggest rolling it back.

[shenmishajing]

Sorry, I may have misrepresented it, what I was trying to say was that you could follow your previous solution and not support include_func and exclude_func.

@zhouzaida Oh……I'm sorry I ignore the no need's no in your comment. So, should I roll it back?

Suggest rolling it back.

@zhouzaida Got it.