No need to be disappointed, Scala generated APIs by code generation for ndarray 
and symbol and if clojure depends on Scala it get those as well.

> On Jun 10, 2018, at 3:40 PM, Chen HY <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> Yep. An example is the cpp port used following code to generate op.h
> automatically.
> 
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/blob/master/cpp-package/scripts/OpWrapperGenerator.py
> 
> It makes easier for everyone to follow up with the latest APIs.
> It is disappointing if the python version supports the latest API but the
> version of your favorite language doesn't.
> 
> 2018-06-10 14:19 GMT+01:00 Naveen Swamy <[email protected]>:
> 
>> this is fantastic, thanks for being a champ. I am glad to have you join us
>> :). Yes, we would love to make it work and be available for our users, you
>> can make features available iteratively. I understand you alone can't have
>> everything in one go, I am hoping more contributors will join the effort.
>> 
>> My guess is Chen is recommending generation of Clojure code from Scala.
>> 
>>> On Sun, Jun 10, 2018 at 2:55 PM, Carin Meier <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Naveen,
>>> 
>>> Thanks. I appreciate your help. I acknowledge there are some challenges
>> in
>>> trying to bring in a new language package, but I think if we can make it
>>> work, it will be the best way for it to grow along with the MXNet project
>>> and be a good fit with its goals and ecosystem long term.
>>> 
>>> I added a confluence page of the general state of what is working and
>> needs
>>> help.
>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/MXNET/
>>> Clojure+Package+Contribution+Needs.
>>> Feel free to edit.
>>> 
>>> Chen,
>>> 
>>> I added the code generator use on the page as well. I don't fully
>>> understand what you are proposing, but I would like to. If you could
>>> provide some more details to help me, that would be great.
>>> 
>>> - Carin
>>> 
>>> 
>>>> On Sun, Jun 10, 2018 at 8:00 AM, Chen HY <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> I personally think that is the reason the clojure package should use
>> more
>>>> code generator.
>>>> It makes easier to build everything align with scala package.
>>>> 
>>>> 2018-06-10 12:45 GMT+01:00 Naveen Swamy <[email protected]>:
>>>> 
>>>>> I have called for contribution within my organization to help with
>> the
>>>>> review, some of them have shown interest and hope to see them help
>> with
>>>> the
>>>>> review. Carin, I learnt you are popular to have given great talks on
>>>>> Clojure.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Could I please ask you document what functionality is working and
>> what
>>>>> parts of it need contribution.
>>>>> 
>>>>> In general I want to request a few things:
>>>>> Good API documentation,
>>>>> Examples, turn examples into integration tests.
>>>>> Tests, more tests
>>>>> Everything testable on CI.
>>>>> 
>>>>> In the long term, We have to think how to maintain API compatibility
>>> and
>>>>> tests across language bindings.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Thanks, Naveen
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> On Sat, Jun 9, 2018 at 2:38 AM, YiZhi Liu <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>>> Carin,
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Thank you for the great work. I'll do the review. As I have no
>>>>>> expertise in Clojure, it will really help to have people from
>> Clojure
>>>>>> community reviewing it as well :)
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 2018-06-08 14:22 GMT-07:00 Carin Meier <[email protected]>:
>>>>>>> A couple of questions came up in regard to the PR and the current
>>>> test
>>>>>>> suite state as well as the best way to review the PR since it is
>> a
>>>> new
>>>>>>> language binding.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> In regards to the Clojure test suite, most of the Scala test
>> suite
>>>> has
>>>>>> been
>>>>>>> ported over with the goal of having comparable coverage. I can go
>>>>> ahead a
>>>>>>> put in a coverage tool to make that it a bit more transparent.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> For reviewing, I have a couple people in the Clojure community
>> that
>>>> are
>>>>>>> interested in collaborating in this project and I can ask them
>> for
>>>> help
>>>>>> in
>>>>>>> reviewing the PR in some way if that is helpful too.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> I'm also open to other suggestions.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>> Carin
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> On Fri, Jun 8, 2018 at 4:06 PM, Carin Meier <
>> [email protected]>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Here is the PR https://github.com/apache/
>>> incubator-mxnet/pull/11205
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> I've ported in the content from the external github repo (
>>>>>>>> https://github.com/gigasquid/clojure-mxnet), that has been
>> tested
>>>> by
>>>>>> some
>>>>>>>> of the Clojure community, into the contrib directory.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> There is still lots more to do in relation to adding tests,
>>>>> benchmarks,
>>>>>>>> and increasing stability, but I thought this might be a good
>> point
>>>> to
>>>>>> bring
>>>>>>>> it in initially so that the other work can be reviewed in
>> smaller
>>>>>> chunks.
>>>>>>>> I also would like to get other people involved in making it
>>> better,
>>>>> so I
>>>>>>>> thought that having the base package in there would be a good
>>>> starting
>>>>>>>> point for collaboration.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Feedback welcome.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> - Carin
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> On Tue, Jun 5, 2018 at 11:40 AM, Carin Meier <
>>> [email protected]>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> Thanks everyone. I'll work on getting together a PR with your
>>>>> feedback
>>>>>>>>> and post it here.
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Jun 5, 2018 at 4:05 AM, Chen HY <[email protected]
>>> 
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> I would suggest using code generators in case upstream library
>>>>> adding
>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>> functions for arrays.
>>>>>>>>>> It seems that cpp binding is using a code generator and works
>>>> fine.
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> 2018-06-05 7:59 GMT+01:00 Naveen Swamy <[email protected]>:
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> ~/mxnet/contrib/clojure-package good place for the code.
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> the package name org.apache.mxnet.contrib.clojure ? do you
>>> need
>>>>>> mxnet
>>>>>>>>>>> again?
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> I forgot to request to run some benchmarks and document. One
>>> of
>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>> reasons
>>>>>>>>>>> users use MXNet is because of its performance and we want to
>>>>> ensure
>>>>>>>>>> that we
>>>>>>>>>>> maintain it across language bindings.
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> Also invite your other clojure programmer buddies to the
>> party
>>>> :)
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks, Naveen
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Jun 4, 2018 at 1:55 PM, Carin Meier <
>>>> [email protected]
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> Oh right. That's not a problem, I wonder if something like
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> org.apache.mxnet.contrib/clojure-mxnet
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> would work?
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> If this seems like it is the right direction, we could
>> work
>>>> out
>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>> details
>>>>>>>>>>>> in a PR.
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Jun 4, 2018 at 4:44 PM, Naveen Swamy <
>>>>> [email protected]>
>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> I agree with your assessment that we shouldn't need the
>>> user
>>>>> to
>>>>>>>>>> change
>>>>>>>>>>>>> their code. I am not sure if we can release under
>>>>>>>>>>>> org.apache.clojure-mxnet
>>>>>>>>>>>>> we might have to stick with our primary group id
>>>>>> org.apache.mxnet
>>>>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>>>>> may
>>>>>>>>>>>>> be create a sub-package under it? any creative ideas?
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Jun 4, 2018 at 1:29 PM, Carin Meier <
>>>>>> [email protected]>
>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks for the feedback everyone.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I agree on the contrib option. I think it's a great
>> path
>>>>>> forward
>>>>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>>>>>>> would
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> allow it time for feedback, contribution by others,
>> and
>>>>>>>>>>> stabilization.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> If I'm understanding correctly, that would mean
>> putting
>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>> source
>>>>>>>>>>> code
>>>>>>>>>>>>> in:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ~/mxnet/contrib/clojure-package
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and having the artifact jar named
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> `org.apache.contrib.clojure-mxnet/clojure-mxnet`
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I would recommend not having the individual namespaces
>>> of
>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>> files
>>>>>>>>>>>> have
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> contrib embedded in them, so that if it graduates,
>> users
>>>>> won't
>>>>>>>>>> have
>>>>>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> change their code, only the dependency.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Please let me know if this is correct or if there are
>>> any
>>>>>> other
>>>>>>>>>>> ideas.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - Carin
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Jun 4, 2018 at 4:03 PM, Naveen Swamy <
>>>>>> [email protected]
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I think that's a great idea to bring in under
>> contrib
>>>> and
>>>>> we
>>>>>>>>>> can
>>>>>>>>>>> also
>>>>>>>>>>>>> get
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> user feedback
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Jun 4, 2018, at 12:44 PM, sandeep
>> krishnamurthy <
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Carin,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> This is a commendable work. Thanks a lot for all
>> the
>>>>> hard
>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>>>>> smart
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> work
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> you have put behind this :-) I think this will be
>> a
>>>>> great
>>>>>>>>>> value
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> addition.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> If people are not sure about usage, can I suggest
>>> this
>>>>>>>>>> awesome
>>>>>>>>>>> work
>>>>>>>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> be
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> brought in "contrib" package? Invite and build the
>>>>>> community
>>>>>>>>>>> around
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Clojure, stabilize and increase the coverage, and
>>>> based
>>>>> on
>>>>>>>>>> usage
>>>>>>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> development, graduate it to main stable support
>> from
>>>>>> contrib.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Suggestions and thoughts?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sandeep
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Jun 4, 2018 at 12:27 PM, Ivan Serdyuk <
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [email protected]>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hello everyone.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> A small comment, about Scala API: main commiters
>>> are
>>>>>> hardly
>>>>>>>>>>>>> available,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> as
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for today.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> As for Clojure - I might suggest that it might be
>>>>>> possible
>>>>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>>>>>>>> enlight
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> future work, for that package, for Clojure
>>>> developers.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Jun 4, 2018 at 8:50 PM, Naveen Swamy <
>>>>>>>>>>> [email protected]
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Carin,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> This is great effort and very nicely documented.
>>>> When
>>>>> I
>>>>>>>>>>> surveyed
>>>>>>>>>>>> at
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> my
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> day
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> job on the interest for Scala packages there
>> were
>>> a
>>>>> few
>>>>>>>>>> people
>>>>>>>>>>>> who
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> specifically were interested in the Clojure
>>>> packages,
>>>>> I
>>>>>>>>>> think
>>>>>>>>>>>> those
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> are
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> people who might have tried and understand the
>>>>>> complexity
>>>>>>>>>> of
>>>>>>>>>>>> making
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Scala
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> work in Clojure.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I am in support of a MXNet-Clojure package, I
>>>> request
>>>>>> you
>>>>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>>>>>> add
>>>>>>>>>>>>> more
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> unit
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> tests and integration tests that can be ported
>> to
>>>> CI.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks for your efforts.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -Naveen
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Jun 1, 2018 at 6:16 PM, Carin Meier <
>>>>>>>>>>>> [email protected]>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It is always a good thing to consider the cost
>>> with
>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>> benefit.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'll
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> do
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> my
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> best to explain what I see the tradeoffs to be.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> First, I wanted to clarify that it took
>>> significant
>>>>>>>>>>> development
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> effort
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> get the Clojure package and the interop working
>>>>>> properly
>>>>>>>>>>> despite
>>>>>>>>>>>>> my
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> simple
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> looking design on the confluence page :)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> One of the advantages of MXNet over its
>>> competitors
>>>>> is
>>>>>> its
>>>>>>>>>>> many
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> language
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> support. The Clojure package would only
>> increase
>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>> value of
>>>>>>>>>>>> this
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> proposition and bring new users and growth into
>>> the
>>>>>>>>>> community.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> However, there is a cost associated with adding
>>>> this
>>>>>>>>>> language
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> support
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> as
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> you pointed out.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Since the Clojure package right now is only
>>> reliant
>>>>> on
>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>> Scala
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> jars
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> from
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Maven, it can exist outside the main project as
>>> an
>>>>>>>>>> independent
>>>>>>>>>>>>> repo
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> but I
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> think that would lessen the growth benefit both
>>> to
>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>> Clojure
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> community
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and to the MXNet community to not be included
>> as
>>> a
>>>>>> first
>>>>>>>>>> class
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> language.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I believe having first class Clojure support in
>>>> MXNet
>>>>>> is
>>>>>>>>>>>> valuable,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> but
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> cost of that support is up to the community to
>>>>> decide.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Is there a process for considering a new
>> package
>>> in
>>>>>> MXNet?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - Carin
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Jun 1, 2018 at 5:51 PM, Chen HY <
>>>>>>>>>>> [email protected]
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Have checked the issue and the confluence
>> page,
>>>> but
>>>>>> still
>>>>>>>>>>>>> curious.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Clojure and Scala are both JVM based
>> languages.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> They, as well as many JVM based languages, can
>>>> share
>>>>>>>>>> their
>>>>>>>>>>>> class
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> method
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> at a certain level.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Why should the community maintain two APIs for
>>> two
>>>>>>>>>> languages
>>>>>>>>>>>> with
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> can
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> share
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> their packages with almost zero effort?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2018-06-01 21:58 GMT+01:00 Carin Meier <
>>>>>>>>>> [email protected]
>>>>>>>>>>>> :
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi all,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I've been working on a Clojure package for
>>> MXNet.
>>>>>> Since
>>>>>>>>>>>> Clojure
>>>>>>>>>>>>> is
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> JVM
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> language, the package leverages the great
>> work
>>> of
>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>> existing
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Scala
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> package.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I would appreciate any feedback and testing.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Here is the original issue:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/apache/
>>>>>> incubator-mxnet/issues/8971
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Architecture & Design:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/
>>>> confluence/display/MXNET/
>>>>>>>>>>>> MXNet+Clojure
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and the github repo for rapid testing and
>> issue
>>>>>> fixing
>>>>>>>>>>> before
>>>>>>>>>>>> of
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> opening
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> an
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> official PR https://github.com/gigasquid/
>>>>>> clojure-mxnet
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm also active in the slack channel so feel
>>> free
>>>>> to
>>>>>>>>>> ping me
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> there.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Carin Meier
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Chen Hanyang 陈涵洋
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Software School Fudan University
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> +86-138-1881-7745
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sandeep Krishnamurthy
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>> Chen Hanyang 陈涵洋
>>>>>>>>>> Software School Fudan University
>>>>>>>>>> +86-138-1881-7745
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> Yizhi Liu
>>>>>> DMLC member
>>>>>> Amazon Web Services
>>>>>> Vancouver, Canada
>>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> --
>>>> Chen Hanyang 陈涵洋
>>>> Software School Fudan University
>>>> +86-138-1881-7745
>>>> 
>>> 
>> 
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Chen Hanyang 陈涵洋
> Software School Fudan University
> +86-138-1881-7745

Reply via email to