Would you be able to us in touch with some customers who are using amalgamation? That way we'd be able to gather some requirements and provide them with a seamless replacement as part of our docker_multiarch https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/tree/master/docker_multiarch .
On Mon, Dec 4, 2017 at 10:54 PM, Lupesko, Hagay <lupe...@gmail.com> wrote: > JavaScript is not the only use case for Amalgamation - I’m familiar with a > few users that use the amalgamation to build Android and iOS apps. > If we take out Amalgamation, unless we provide target builds for these > platforms, these users and use cases will be left out. > > Hagay > > On 11/21/17, 11:50, "Pedro Larroy" <pedro.larroy.li...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Anybody against removing amalgamation then? emscripten build is > already using CMake. > > On Tue, Nov 21, 2017 at 9:22 AM, Tianqi Chen <tqc...@cs.washington.edu> > wrote: > > Yes, you can call emscripten from CMake > > > > Tianqi > > > > On Mon, Nov 20, 2017 at 5:42 PM, Pedro Larroy < > pedro.larroy.li...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > > >> I like the idea of amalgamation, I have used it in SQLite as it > makes > >> very easy to just drop one header file and one source file in > another > >> project to use the library. > >> > >> But SQLite is often used as a library embedded in platforms / other > >> libraries. > >> > >> What's the use case of amalgamation in MXNet when we can build the > >> binary library for all the platforms with MXNet's build system? Who > >> is using MXNet as an embedded library that can't use the shared > >> library + headers or specific language bindings? > >> > >> Can't we call emscripten from CMake? I'm not familiar with our JS > >> bindings, but I don't see why we can't compile for emscripten as for > >> any other platform. > >> > >> Pedro. > >> > >> On Mon, Nov 20, 2017 at 11:59 PM, Tianqi Chen < > tqc...@cs.washington.edu> > >> wrote: > >> > We could resort to a middle ground. Instead of having an > amalgamation > >> > script that generates a single file, simply have a file that > includes > >> > everything and compiles that one. Which should also work. > >> > > >> > The javascript port can likely be superseded with some form of > support in > >> > nnvm compiler, which transpires and generate likely more > efficient code > >> > than current version. We can enable that feature now except that > there > >> is > >> > no dedicated developer on it yet. We can talk about full > deprecation > >> after > >> > this > >> > > >> > > >> > Tianqi > >> > > >> > On Mon, Nov 20, 2017 at 2:47 PM, Pedro Larroy < > >> pedro.larroy.li...@gmail.com> > >> > wrote: > >> > > >> >> Hi all > >> >> > >> >> Given that we have working builds for ARM, Android, TX2 and the > main > >> >> architectures, and after considering how amalgamation is done. I > would > >> >> like to propose that we deprecate and remove amalgamation. > >> >> > >> >> I don't think the cost of maintaining this feature and how it's > done > >> >> justifies the ROI, given that we can now produce binary builds > for > >> >> embedded platforms in a comfortable way. It's also consuming > build & > >> >> test resources. > >> >> > >> >> We should strive to simplify our build system and development > process. > >> >> > >> >> Pedro. > >> >> > >> > > > >
