Hi all,

This challenge was set for me by spectie, and it was to integrate the
ambiguous weighted rules program to apertium-transfer program.
Sorry Spectie for being late, I was unavailable for some days.
I think the challenge is finished now and the new command for our program -
also added to the help message for apertium-transfer - is :

apertium-transfer -a trules localeid models k [input [output]]

where -a for ambiguous, trules for chunker transfer file (.t1x), localeid
is ICU locale ID for the source language -I think there is a way to make it
figures the source language automatically- , models is the yasmet trained
models folder path , k is beam size for beam search algorithm used to
choose the best possible translation , input is the input from lexical
transfer and finally output is the output file path or stdout id left empty
and it has the program output which is the ambiguous rules out chunks for
the first stage.

- For the models being a destination for models folder , instead of a file
contains all the models. It is not a hard task to merge all the models into
one file through some script, though it would need a little modification in
the program manipulation with the models. So I preferred to go on and learn
how integrate the code into apertium's and how to modify the makefile. I
struggled a bit with the makefile as I have a little exposure to it with
more simpler makefiles. Also I needed to modify our program a little bit to
be able to integrate with apertium.
- For preproc, I omitted it because we don't use it in our program, just
the .t1x file.
- For input being default instead of lexical transfer only, I didn't manage
to make it an option. because I will have then to use transfer.cc with our
code, which I found hard for the task of just making the code work as it
is. As I was supposed to make the transfer object to do only the
preBilingual without making the actual transfer.

But now I still have some doubts with your statement spectie saying "using
our coding style" as it was a little vague, or may be it was so because I
didn't ask about it , I wanted to make it work first then ask about further
information. I wondered If you meant to use the transfer.cc file instead of
our implemented one -which is a difficult task because I think I need
enough time to go deep and understand your code and then be able to use it
to achieve the same result, though it would be very less buggy I think and
also lots our program's bugs have been solved throughout the past months -
, or to make our implementation code style like yours -which is a difficult
task too because your code is so professional compared to ours and I think
also it would take some time- , or finally to integrate our code with
transfer.cc and then make it used by apertium_transfer. Honestly, I chose
the easiest and fastest solution which is doing little modification to my
code and yours to make the program works.

I forked apertium core and then added and modified some files and it's now
ready in my forked repo, you can take a look here
https://github.com/aboelhamd/apertium

And now spectie, what's next ? Can we discuss further in the documentation
, thoughts and questions I wrote in the past week or two , or you still
have some modifications or tasks for me to do ?

Thanks and sorry for my verbose message.
Aboelhamd
_______________________________________________
Apertium-stuff mailing list
Apertium-stuff@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/apertium-stuff

Reply via email to