When is the release planned. On 24 Jun 2014 02:11, "Masanz, James J." <[email protected]> wrote:
> > That would be good to know. I think a good start would be to have a > comparison from one release to the next, where when release N is built, > some test is run using release N and using release N-1. The CPE Gui will > show a breakdown of how long each annotator took in total for a set of > documents. I assume we could get that information programmatically fairly > easy. > > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] (Andy McMurry) [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Monday, June 23, 2014 2:57 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: LVG Thread Safety > > I wonder how much cTAKES performance changes with even minor changes to > LVG. > > In principle, thread safety shouldn't change the output, but even minor > updates (LVG.2014) makes me wonder. > > Thoughts? > > On Jun 23, 2014, at 11:58 AM, "John Green" <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > Nice!- > > Sent from Mailbox for iPhone > > > > On Mon, Jun 23, 2014 at 2:57 PM, Chen, Pei < > [email protected]> > > wrote: > > > >> +dev@ > >> Chris, > >> This awesome news. Yes we'll be happy to try out the fix. > >> Thanks again, > >> Pei > >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CTAKES-151 > >> From: Lu, Chris (NIH/NLM/LHC) [C] [mailto:[email protected]] > >> Sent: Monday, June 23, 2014 2:54 PM > >> To: Chen, Pei > >> Cc: Browne, Allen (NIH/NLM/LHC) [E]; Lu, Chris (NIH/NLM/LHC) [C] > >> Subject: RE: LVG Thread Safety > >> Hi Pei, > >> How are you doing? > >> We have evaluated your request regarding to the thread safety issue on > the SPECIALIST Lexical Tools. Bellows are the summary. Please let us know > if you have any suggestions, comments, or questions. This SCR is a major > source code change and, if you like, we will send you a nightly built > version of lvg.2015 (using lvg.2014 data) in July so you can try it before > the official NLM internal release of lvg.2015 is released (in Oct.). Please > let us know, Thank you! > >> 1). Static variables > >> => Thank you (and Kim) to point out this issue. Here are how we plan to > modify "static variables" in the Java codes: > >> 1-a). Change static variables to final static variables (if applicable) > >> 1-b). Change static variables to local variables (if applicable) > >> 1-c). Keep "static String fieldSeparator_" in Lib.GlobalBehavior.java > and use "synchronized" for the associated static methods. > >> ð There will be too many changes for Flows APIs if we decided to > change it to local variable. > >> 1-d). Keep the rest of static variables under GuiTool > >> ð Assuming users do not use GuiTool (lgt) under multi-thread > environment. > >> There are 88 files need to be modified for this software change request. > >> 2) Standardize Java package namespace convention on lvg API: > >> => There were legacy reasons that all Lvg Java codes under directory of > Tools do not use the standard Java package convention. However, we are > happy to make the change for your requests. > >> There are 11 Java files of command line tools and 43 Java files of GUI > tool need to be modified. > >> Hope this helps. Thank you! > >> Best Regards > >> - Chris > >
