On Sat, Apr 24, 2010 at 11:50 PM, Ted Dunning <ted.dunn...@gmail.com> wrote:
> If we are talking about the Writable aspect of this, then whatever input > format we use should reasonably be able to handle both kinds of data with > the conversions as you suggest. > Yes, Having two separate writable classes as of the moment creates this issue. > > For algorithms that are accepting arguments of a particular type, it might > be reasonable to let NVW extend VW (I am not at all sure about the > unintended consequences of this, but it sounds plausible). Then all we > need is a facade that exposes an NVW interface for a wrapped VectorWritable > with some kind of default labels (say the indexes as strings). > Or the other way around. Let everything be a NamedVectorWritable. during deserializing use explicit methods to use or skip the name > > On Sat, Apr 24, 2010 at 11:04 AM, Robin Anil <robin.a...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Some algorithms are using NamedVectorWritable, Some using VectorWritable. > > Shouldn't we need an identity convertor for forward and some form of > naming > > assign convertor for backward conversion. Otherwise its going to be messy > > > > Robin > > >
