Hi, The following is the status of the MLContext test for algorithms.
1. l2svm, msvm, PCA - scripts are running + results are not equal to R 2. Autoencoder, StepwiseReg - Scripts are not running 3. KMeans, GLM (need to fix R) - No R script Thank you, Janardhan On Fri, Jul 10, 2020 at 2:29 AM Matthias Boehm <mboe...@gmail.com> wrote: > thanks for the perspective, I think we should be very pragmatic > regarding languages. Let's stick to DML as our domain-specific language > with R-like syntax, but add language bindings such as the Python API > (and others) to seamlessly plug into common data science workflows. A > similar mind set worked very well in the internals too: Java for nicely > integrating with Hadoop/Spark and simplicity, but with C++ and CUDA > kernels and native libraries where necessary. > > Regards, > Matthias > > On 7/9/2020 3:54 PM, Janardhan wrote: > > DML - %*% seems more Intuitive compared to @. Let us not change the > syntax > > ( our selling point easy porting to R! ) > > Python - no solid opinion > > > > - Janardhan > > > > On Thu, 9 Jul, 2020, 19:06 Matthias Boehm, <mboe...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > >> for the Python API this is fine, for DML not as we should stick as close > >> as possible to R syntax. Once we had a pydml syntax too, but this > >> created lots of inconsistencies and could not use Python as a host > >> language. So, I think restricting such changes to the Python API is a > >> good path forward. Other opinions? > >> > >> Regards, > >> Matthias > >> > >> On 7/9/2020 3:31 PM, Baunsgaard, Sebastian wrote: > >>> Hi all > >>> > >>> > >>> Can i suggest a radical change of matrix multiply. > >>> to change the command from %*% to @. > >>> > >>> Python has made this commitment! > >>> > >>> > >>> https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0465/ > >>> > >>> > >>> or at least change this in the python API? > >>> > >>> > >>> Best regards > >>> > >>> Sebastian > >>> > >>> ________________________________ > >>> From: Matthias Boehm <mboe...@gmail.com> > >>> Sent: Wednesday, July 8, 2020 11:04:12 PM > >>> To: dev@systemds.apache.org > >>> Subject: [DISCUSS] Apache SystemDS 2.0 Release > >>> > >>> Hi all, > >>> > >>> I'd like to propose Aug 31 as a target date for the SystemDS 2.0 > release > >>> (feature freeze August 21). This should gives us enough time to figure > >>> out the list of things that still should go into this release as it's > an > >>> opportunity of a major for changes of external behavior. However, as > >>> it's the first SystemDS Apache release, I think we should still stick > to > >>> Spark 2.x and Java 8 and consider upgrades of Spark and the JDK for > >>> subsequent releases. So, what do you think and any major features you'd > >>> like to see complete for 2.0? > >>> > >>> Regards, > >>> Matthias > >>> > >> > > >
