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

Fix/simplify some validation steps #643

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Apr 18, 2024

Conversation

inexorabletash
Copy link
Member

@inexorabletash inexorabletash commented Apr 16, 2024

  • Overzealous conversion of "p of x" to "x's p" mangled some cases of "p of x, y or z"; fix them.
  • When validating optional arguments, shorten substeps by using "its" more consistently rather than restating the option name.
  • A few places were operating on options unconditionally. Make those conditional.
  • When comparing two args (e.g. dataTypes), make the order consistent, i.e. "if filter's dataType is not the same as input's data type".
  • Prefer "equal to" over "the same as" in algorithms.
  • Fix a list literal to use «»

Also, sneak in another case where [EMULATED] text macro can be used.


Preview | Diff

- Overzealous conversion of "p of x" to "x's p" mangled some cases of
  "p of x, y or z"; fix them.

- When validating optional arguments, shorten substeps by using "its"
  more consistently rather than restating the option name.

- A few places were operating on options unconditionally. Make those
  conditional.

- When comparing two args (e.g. dataTypes), make the order consistent,
  i.e. "if filter's dataType is not the same as input's data type".

- Prefer "equal to" over "the same as" in algorithms.

- Fix a list literal to use «»

Also, sneak in another case where [EMULATED] text macro can be used.
@inexorabletash
Copy link
Member Author

This is a preamble to a change that introduces dataType validation to all ops where necessary - this cleanup work was noticed along the way, and keeps that upcoming change nice and clean.

@inexorabletash
Copy link
Member Author

Please take a look @huningxin and @fdwr ?

Copy link
Contributor

@huningxin huningxin left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM, thanks for the fix!

Copy link
Collaborator

@fdwr fdwr left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Small comments, else LGTM. Thanks Josh.

Copy link
Collaborator

@fdwr fdwr left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Thanks Josh.

@fdwr fdwr merged commit 26982c4 into webmachinelearning:main Apr 18, 2024
2 checks passed
github-actions bot added a commit that referenced this pull request Apr 18, 2024
SHA: 26982c4
Reason: push, by fdwr

Co-authored-by: github-actions[bot] <41898282+github-actions[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
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.

4 participants