I'd like to be able to write a yaml file something like:
runner:
_target_: my_module.Runner
lightning_module:
_target_: my_module.MyLightingModule
precision: 16
data_module:
_target_: my_module.MyDataModule
training_data: s3://foo/bar.csv
validation_data: s3://foo/bar_val.csv
test_data: s3://foo/bar_tst.csv
and then in my program run this whole thing by doing simply:
runner = hydra.utils.instantiate(cfg)
runner.run()
I see there is a PR to enable recursive instantiation, ie https://github.com/facebookresearch/hydra/pull/989 Please can you confirm that this will enable the code/config above?
Also, what is intended release date for this merged PR?
(I feel kind of a little bit non-standard putting questions which are basically feature requests into stackoverflow, so if you have a better suggestion on where to put these, please let me know)
Go ahead and check-out Hydra from master and play with the recursive instantiation support to confirm for yourself.
The docs for instantiate in the next version are here.
There is no set date for 1.1. but it will be a while.
At some point there will be some dev releases though. For now you can install from master.
Related
I'm stuck using the 4.0 version of lua which does not seem to support the os library. Is there a way to include this library into my project?
Or get another way to use the functionality contained within pertaining to date time calculations?
Preferably by using a *.lua file and not a *.c file since I don't have complete access to the code.
When I run the following line,
print(os.time{year=1970, month=1, day=1, hour=0})
I get an error stating:
attempt to index global 'os'(a nil value)
As #Colonel Thirty Two said it's not possible to use the os library. So the time() funciton is not available for me.
Adding to the (totally correct) currently accepted answer (that if "os" access was not allowed to you, you're generally done), there's some very slight chance the Original Programmer may have provided you with some alternative facilities to do your thing (fingers crossed). In a perfect world, those would be described in some kind of a User's Manual for your scripting environment. But if the manual was lost to time (or never existed in the first place), you might possibly try your luck at exploring any preloaded libraries by digging through the result of the globals() Basic Function. (At least I hope that's how it was done in 4.0 too.) That is, if the Original Programmer didn't block globals() for you too...
My package introduces registry entries. Changes by site administrator should not be overwritten on reinstall of the package.
Many ways to Rome. I chose ftw.upgrade. I like the declarative way of the upgrade step syntax. Its possible to use an upgrade directory for generic setup xml-Files like propertiestool.xml. No need to define handler python code. The upgrade works well. The admin can upgrade from control panel and in my case the new property is added. Insomma: For a new property just these have to be added: an upgrade-step declaration for source and destination version and directory where to find the properties.xml. Thumb up! –
You can pilot what to do when installing a Plone add-on by providing an Extension/install.py file with a install method inside:
def install(portal, reinstall=False):
if not reinstall:
setup_tool = portal.portal_setup
setup_tool.runAllImportStepsFromProfile('profile-your.pfile:default')
This way you are driving what Plone should do when installing.
If you need it: the same if for uninstall:
def uninstall(portal, reinstall=False):
if not reinstall:
setup_tool = portal.portal_setup
setup_tool.runAllImportStepsFromProfile('profile-example.gs:uninstall')
This way you can prevent the uninstall step to be run when reinstalling.
Warning: as Mathias suggested using quickinstaller -> reinstall feature is bad.
Warning: this will not probably work anymore on Plone 5 (there's open discussion about this).
I think what you describe is one of the problems upcoming with the increasing complexity of Plone's stack, and one of the reasons, why it is not recommended to execute a re-install anymore, but to provide a profile for each version of the Add-On, via upgrade-steps (as Mathias mentioned). That increases dev-time significantly and results in even more conflicts, of my experience. Here are the refering docs:
http://docs.plone.org/develop/addons/components/genericsetup.html#add-upgrade-step
Elizabeth Leddy once wrote an Add-On to ease that pain and I can confirm it does:
https://github.com/ampsport/amp.ezupgrade
And the great guys from FTW, too, I never used it, but looks promising:
https://pypi.python.org/pypi/ftw.upgrade
Neither used this one, even claims to have some extra goodies, like cleanup broken OFS objects and R. Patterson's on it:
https://github.com/collective/collective.upgrade
As we're here, the first good doc I could find about it ~ 1.5 years ago, comes from Uwosh, of course:
http://www.uwosh.edu/ploneprojects/docs/how-tos/how-to-use-generic-setup-upgrade-steps
Another solution can be, to check, if it's an initial- or re-install, and set the properties programatically via a Python-script, conveniently called 'setuphandlers.py', like described in this answer:
How to check, if my product is already installed, when installing it?
That way one can still trigger re-installs without blowing it all up.
Lastly, a lot of the GS-xml-files understand the purge-property, setting it to False, will not overwrite the whole file, just your given props. This might, or not, apply to your case, you can find samples in the above referenced official doc.
How to use dart-mirror API to create a anonymous closure dynamically?
Like as the interpreter, compile the code during run-time.
var funcstr='bool (String s){ return (s==null); }';
var func=parseStr(funcstr);
// func(s)-> s==null;
var r=func('false');
// r=false;
so, how to do with "parseStr"?
my project:
http://github.com/stevehsu77/surebet
At the moment there is no way to do this. Dart has no eval and no code generation at runtime.
But it is something Gilad Bracha (the language spec lead of Dart) wants to have (https://groups.google.com/a/dartlang.org/forum/#!topic/misc/6O4g7eEHgOU) at least for the development environment.
Also
We’d like to support more powerful reflective features in the future. These would include mirror builders, designed to allow programs to extend and modify themselves, and a mirror-based debugging API as well.
https://www.dartlang.org/articles/reflection-with-mirrors/
So it'll probably be supported some time in the future. But right now it's not possible.
As mentioned above, Dart does not have eval, however it is possible to load new source code in another isolate using spawnUri().
I am not sure if there are any examples of how to use this. Perhaps post a message on the dart discussion group.
Using isolates and spawnUri() is quite a different than using eval, so it may not be the right fit for your project.
I have a rather big library with a significant set of APIs that I need to expose. In fact, I'd like to expose the whole thing. There is a lot of namespacing going on, like:
FooLibrary.Bar
FooLibrary.Qux.Rumps
FooLibrary.Qux.Scrooge
..
Basically, what I would like to do is make sure that the user can access that whole namespace. I have had a whole bunch of trouble with this, and I'm totally new to closure, so I thought I'd ask for some input.
First, I need closurebuilder.py to send the full list of files to the closure compiler. This doesn't seem supported: --namespace Foo does not include Foo.Bar. --input only allows a single file, not a directory. Nor can I simply send my list of files to the closure compiler directly, because my code is also requiring things like "goog.assers", so I do need the resolver.
In fact, the only solution I can see is having a FooLibrary.ExposeAPI JS file that #require's everything. Surely that can't be right?
This is my main issue.
However, later the closure compiler, with ADVANCED_OPTIMIZATIONS on, will optimize all these names away. Now I can fix that by adding "#export" all over the place, which I am not happy about, but should work. I suppose it would also be valid to use an extern here. Or I could simply disable advanced optimizations.
What I can't do, apparently, is say "export FooLibrary.*". Wouldn't that make sense?
Finally, for working in source mode, I need to do goog.require() for every namespace I am using. This is merely an inconvenience, though I am mentioning because it sort of related to my trouble above. I would prefer to be able to do:
goog.requireRecursively('FooLibrary')
in order to pull all the child namespaces as well; thus, recreating with a single command the environment that I have when I am using the compiled version of my library.
I feel like I am possibly misunderstanding some things, or how Closure is supposed to be used. I'd be interested in looking at other Closure-based libraries to see how they solve this.
You are discovering that Closure-compiler is built more for the end consumer and not as much for the library author.
If you are exporting basically everything, then you would be better off with SIMPLE_OPTIMIZATIONS. I would still highly encourage you to maintain compatibility of your library with ADVANCED_OPTIMIZATIONS so that users can compile the library source with their project.
First, I need closurebuilder.py to send the full list of files to the closure compiler. ...
In fact, the only solution I can see is having a FooLibrary.ExposeAPI JS file that #require's everything. Surely that can't be right?
You would need to specify an --root of your source folder and specify the namespaces of the leaf nodes of your file dependency tree. You may have better luck with the now deprecated CalcDeps.py script. I still use it for some projects.
What I can't do, apparently, is say "export FooLibrary.*". Wouldn't that make sense?
You can't do that because it only makes sense based on the final usage. You as the library writer wish to export everything, but perhaps a consumer of your library wishes to include the source (uncompiled) version and have more dead code elimination. Library authors are stuck in a kind of middle ground between SIMPLE and ADVANCED optimization levels.
What I have done for this case is maintain a separate exports file for my namespace that exports everything. When compiling a standalone version of my library for distribution, the exports file is included in the compilation. However I can still include the library source (without the exports) into a project and get full dead code elimination. The work/payoff balance of this though must be weighed against just using SIMPLE_OPTIMIZATIONS for the standalone library.
My GeolocationMarker library has an example of this strategy.
Can I know how an experienced OCaml developer debugs his code?
What I am doing is just using Printf.printf. It is too troublesome as I have to comment them all out when I need a clean output.
How should I better control this debugging process? special annotation to switch those logging on or off?
thanks
You can use bolt for this purpose. It's a syntax extension.
Btw. Ocaml has a real debugger.
There is a feature of the OCaml debugger that you may not be aware of which is not commonly found with stateful programming and is called time travel. See section 16.4.4. Basically since all of the information from step to step is kept on the stack, by keeping the changes associated with each step saved during processing, one can move through the changes in time to see the values during that step. Think of it as running the program once logging all of the values at each step into a data store then indexing into that data store based on a step number to see the values at that step.
You can also use ocp-ppx-debug which will add a printf with the good location instead of adding them manually.
https://github.com/OCamlPro-Couderc/ocp-ppx-debug