Ok, we can always resurrect it. I'll leave this thread open until after work tonight (8 hrs or so from now), and if I don't hear any vociferous complaints or reasoned thoughts on why this is crazy, I'll chop 'em.
-jake On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 11:34 AM, Ted Dunning <[email protected]> wrote: > Let's nuke it. > > I am the most vocal in favor and I can't get up the enthusiasm to push for > keeping it. > > On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 11:31 AM, Sean Owen <[email protected]> wrote: > > > The only thought I have about it is that there's a to-do to make that > > stuff actually used and integrate into a wrapper class. I think it's > > fine to kill it. If someone goes to all the trouble of re-implementing > > it later it will not have been extra work; it probably was to be > > redone anyway. > > > > On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 6:28 PM, Jake Mannix <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 11:22 AM, Ted Dunning <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > > > > >> It seems like a good idea, but it definitely is not impossible to work > > >> around the lack. > > >> > > > > > > And more importantly, it may be a good idea in theory, but has anyone > > > actually used it, or foresee using it soon? > > > > > > It's 9 methods in a core interface. We should make Sean proud of our > > > willingness to kill code as much as we add it, it it's not useful! :) > > > > > > > > >> Having the labels should make certain forms of cluster dumping easier, > > but > > >> for all the stuff I do with hashed representations, the hashing > destroys > > >> any utility of labels. > > >> > > > > > > It *could* make it easier, but none of our current cluster dumping code > > > actually uses it. > > > > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MAHOUT-845 > > > > > > Is some recent discussions around how I'd imagine this should be done > > > in practice (and doesn't require these methods). > > > > > > -jake > > > > > >
