Skip to content

template reordering and ambiguity clarification#1

Closed
tpajenkamp wants to merge 1 commit intomeierue:masterfrom
tpajenkamp:rnnlib-fix
Closed

template reordering and ambiguity clarification#1
tpajenkamp wants to merge 1 commit intomeierue:masterfrom
tpajenkamp:rnnlib-fix

Conversation

@tpajenkamp
Copy link
Copy Markdown

  • Helpers.hpp needed some templates to be reordered.
  • Function range() from Helpers.hpp was called in an ambiguous way
    on several occurances.

Project did not compile on my machine (Ubuntu 14.04.3 LTS, g++ 4.8.4, Boost 1.54). The changes above where necessary to make it work.

* Helpers.hpp needed some templates to be reordered.
* Function range() from Helpers.hpp was called in an ambiguous way
  on several occurances.

Project did not compile on my machine (Ubuntu 14.04.3 LTS,
g++ 4.8.4, Boost 1.54). The changes above where necessary to make
it work.
@xavigonzalvo
Copy link
Copy Markdown

Have you tried this? https://github.com/xavigonzalvo/rnnlib

@tpajenkamp
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Author

It is solely based on the code posted on sourceforge (http://sourceforge.net/projects/rnnl/), isn't it? I want to test the regression feature which does not work with that version, as far as I can tell.

@xavigonzalvo
Copy link
Copy Markdown

Ah ok! Yes it is.
On Oct 6, 2015 6:34 PM, "Thomas Pajenkamp" notifications@github.com wrote:

It is solely based on the code posted on sourceforge (
http://sourceforge.net/projects/rnnl/), isn't it? I want to test the
regression feature which does not work with that version, as far as I can
tell.


Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#1 (comment).

@sehe
Copy link
Copy Markdown

sehe commented Dec 17, 2015

Ah. We fixed mostly the same issues in mostly the same way. #2

You missed the unqualified ::equal that also prevented successful compilation on my Ubuntu 15.10

Also, I think the fix to indices is incorrect in this pull request (it needs to be an unsigned type).

Finally, my pull request has the changes nicely split out into separate commits.

(not posting this as a critique; posting it to save time for others reviewing the differences)

Cheers!

@tpajenkamp
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Author

Thanks for the comment. The fixes worked on my machine and I assumed the function signature was correct, but I guess you are right.

@tpajenkamp tpajenkamp closed this Dec 17, 2015
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.

3 participants