That sounds like a good idea. On 9 October 2014 15:24, Stefan Karpinski <[email protected]> wrote:
> 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. >>>> >>> >>> >
