Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

🔨 Refactor Engine.predict method #1772

Merged
merged 6 commits into from
Feb 27, 2024

Conversation

ashwinvaidya17
Copy link
Collaborator

📝 Description

✨ Changes

Select what type of change your PR is:

  • 🐞 Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
  • 🔨 Refactor (non-breaking change which refactors the code base)
  • 🚀 New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
  • 💥 Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing functionality to not work as expected)
  • 📚 Documentation update
  • 🔒 Security update

✅ Checklist

Before you submit your pull request, please make sure you have completed the following steps:

  • 📋 I have summarized my changes in the CHANGELOG and followed the guidelines for my type of change (skip for minor changes, documentation updates, and test enhancements).
  • 📚 I have made the necessary updates to the documentation (if applicable).
  • 🧪 I have written tests that support my changes and prove that my fix is effective or my feature works (if applicable).

For more information about code review checklists, see the Code Review Checklist.

Signed-off-by: Ashwin Vaidya <ashwinnitinvaidya@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Ashwin Vaidya <ashwinnitinvaidya@gmail.com>
Copy link
Contributor

@samet-akcay samet-akcay left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

thanks!

Copy link
Contributor

@djdameln djdameln left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Are you going to make the same changes for the other entrypoints? In the following for example,

    def fit(
        self,
        model: AnomalyModule,
        train_dataloaders: TRAIN_DATALOADERS | AnomalibDataModule | None = None,
        val_dataloaders: EVAL_DATALOADERS | None = None,
        datamodule: AnomalibDataModule | None = None,
        ckpt_path: str | None = None,
    ) -> None:

it would be more consistent if train_dataloaders is only allowed to be a (list of) dataloader(s)

@ashwinvaidya17
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Are you going to make the same changes for the other entrypoints? In the following for example,

    def fit(
        self,
        model: AnomalyModule,
        train_dataloaders: TRAIN_DATALOADERS | AnomalibDataModule | None = None,
        val_dataloaders: EVAL_DATALOADERS | None = None,
        datamodule: AnomalibDataModule | None = None,
        ckpt_path: str | None = None,
    ) -> None:

it would be more consistent if train_dataloaders is only allowed to be a (list of) dataloader(s)

Ah good point! I'll update those as well

@samet-akcay samet-akcay linked an issue Feb 27, 2024 that may be closed by this pull request
@samet-akcay samet-akcay merged commit 2ba3eb6 into openvinotoolkit:main Feb 27, 2024
5 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

[Task]: Revisit data typing in engine entrypoints
3 participants