-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 116
models/generated: regenerate number models #15
base: master
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Conversation
Same underlying models, different filename, new generation code.
The strip model regeneration looks more like the kind of diff I expected. By the way, have we checked on the performance impact of removing EIGEN_NO_DEBUG? |
I'll try to take a look late tonight, or else as soon as possible thereafter. (Our code generators can now handle N-level models; formerly limited to two(?) levels. The changes related to that are probably responsible for most of the diff.) |
Any time this week is fine. I have plenty of other things to fix in the meantime. :) |
Hmmm. My money is on this not being right. :) It currently doesn't compile, due to the switch from
|
(How does importing just "conv.h" work for the expiry models?) |
You're building the DMZ in the context of Cython? I don't think that the expiry models are included in that context; they're included only when building CardIO ( For building CardIO, Not sure about the Eigen errors... |
FWIW, I just pasted the contents of your new No error re A couple of Eigen errors, though. Sigh. |
Any news on this, @dgoldman-ebay? |
@dgoldman-ebay I renamed some of our model files, and I wanted to re-export them so that the file names would match here. However, the export code was broken for our old files (no dropout_rate, no activation) so I had to fix it up. I was thus disconcerted when this diff came out as big as it is, given that this is the same underlying model as before.
Would you mind looking through this diff and confirming that all these changes are expected and desired? Thanks!