# HG changeset patch # User Yoshua Bengio # Date 1285256959 14400 # Node ID 067b2f9ba1221e7550758eee33752b55dc406ecb # Parent 91c285e30364fd53286a2e45242bca1c41971b29 comments by YB on JB's arch_sr/plugin_JB.py diff -r 91c285e30364 -r 067b2f9ba122 doc/v2_planning/arch_src/plugin_JB_comments_YB.txt --- /dev/null Thu Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 +0000 +++ b/doc/v2_planning/arch_src/plugin_JB_comments_YB.txt Thu Sep 23 11:49:19 2010 -0400 @@ -0,0 +1,26 @@ + +YB. I am very worried about this proposal. It looks again like we would be +creating another language to replace one we already have, namely python, +mainly so that we could have introspection and programmable changes +into an existing control flow structure (e.g. the standard DBN code). + +I feel that the negatives outweigh the advantages. + +Please correct me: + +Disadvantages: + +* much more difficult to read +* much more difficult to debug + +Advantages: + +* easier to serialize (can't we serialize an ordinary Python class created by a normal user?) +* possible but not easier to programmatically modify existing learning algorithms + (why not the usual constructor parameters and hooks, + when possible, and just create another code for a new DBN variant when it can't fit?) +* am I missing something? + +I am not convinced that any of the stated advantages can't be achieved in more traditional ways. + +