Hey Gopi, I totally agree with Ryan, using existing parser will accelerate the project and allow to move forward with the dataframe class. Also, I do believe that replacing boost Spirit with an existing parser will take a considerable amount of the summer.
Thanks, Omar On 03/29, Ryan Curtin wrote: > On Mon, Mar 29, 2021 at 04:17:35PM +0530, Gopi Manohar Tatiraju wrote: > > Would love to hear your thoughts on whether to go with an already > > implemented parser or build a new one. Also if we are planning to build a > > data frame here then > > maybe going with an in-house parser would be better as we will have the > > ability to design it in such a way that it can extend maximum support to > > the new data frame > > which we are planning to build ahead. > > Hey Gopi, > > Honestly I think it's best to use another package. Not only will this > free up time to actually work on the dataframe class, but also it means > we are not responsible for maintenance of the CSV parser. There are > lots of little complexities and edge cases in parsing (not to mention > efficiency!) and so we can probably get a lot more bang for our buck > here by using an implementation from someone who has already put down > the time to consider all those details. > > Hope this is helpful. :) > > Thanks, > > Ryan > > -- > Ryan Curtin | "Kill them, Machine... kill them all." > [email protected] | - Dino Velvet
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ mlpack mailing list [email protected] http://knife.lugatgt.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mlpack
