I wonder if it makes sense to combine the two at all. Initially, it's
probably safe to make a separate package and then consider factoring out
common types and behaviors after the fact. Looking forward to seeing this!

On Thu, Oct 9, 2014 at 6:01 AM, Oliver Adams <[email protected]> wrote:

> Based on a cursory read of the linked page, there doesn't seem to be a
> connection of practical significance.
>
> I'm going to start coding up a little package. I did note the
> FiniteStateMachine <https://github.com/tensorjack/FiniteStateMachine.jl>
> package, which is somewhat related but doesn't have transducers or support
> many operations.
>
> On Tuesday, 7 October 2014 13:57:11 UTC+1, Stefan Karpinski wrote:
>>
>> Not that I'm aware of. Possibly dumb question that I can't seem to find
>> the answer to: what connection, if any, is there between these transducers
>> and Clojure's new concept
>> <http://blog.cognitect.com/blog/2014/8/6/transducers-are-coming> by the
>> same name?
>>
>> On Tue, Oct 7, 2014 at 5:42 AM, Oliver Adams <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi there. I'm interested in doing some work with weighted finite-state
>>> transducers in Julia. If there's something in the spirit of OpenFst or the
>>> Python wrapper pyfst, it'd be great to know. If not then it might be fun,
>>> educational and maybe even practical to implement some stuff myself. But
>>> I'd rather not reinvent the wheel - has anyone been working on a package
>>> that does this sort of stuff?
>>>
>>> Thanks.
>>>
>>
>>

Reply via email to