search

FluxML / Functors.jl

Parameterise all the things
https://fluxml.ai/Functors.jl/stable/
MIT License
118 stars 15 forks source link

One-argument `fmapstructure(x)` #56

Open mcabbott opened 1 year ago

mcabbott commented 1 year ago

Maybe this should be called fstructure(x) since there's no map. The point is to strip all the types for saving etc. Apparently others believe this method should exist: https://discourse.julialang.org/t/how-to-load-bson-file-of-the-model-build-with-flux-0-12-10-to-use-with-flux-0-13-flux-diagonal-deprecated-problem/91588/2

PR Checklist

ToucheSir commented 1 year ago

Could we find a more descriptive name by ditching the f<verb> convention here? Frankly it only made sense for functions which might've been confused for Base ones, and otherwise mostly serves to confuse folks who don't know about FP idioms.

mcabbott commented 1 year ago

Is structure(x) going to be confusing next to destructure which isn't the opposite? Other words... plain or simple etc?

ToucheSir commented 1 year ago

As long as it isn't exported I don't see an issue. We've been given to using "restructure" as the inverse of "destructure", after all. That said, made up verbs like "structurize" might also work.

darsnack commented 1 year ago

Jax uses tree_structure to return the treedef. I think it could be confusing to use *structure both in verb and noun form. Could we do structural_def(x) or structural(x) to imply that we are keeping the structural definition of the tree?

mcabbott commented 1 year ago

What I don't like about fmapstructure as a name (in any form) is that the "structures" are precisely what it does not preserve. It preserves the graph of children, it uses only Base objects...

darsnack commented 1 year ago

What about tree_def(x) or graph_def(x)? So "give me the graph definition that underlies these nested structures."

mcabbott commented 1 year ago

There has got to be a nice name somewhere. They aren't strictly trees due to cache. "simple" or "strip" or "raw"... It's basically a recursive application of children, does that go anywhere, "family", "grandkids"?! child_graph(x)?

darsnack commented 1 year ago

I think any ancestral tree/graph analogies beyond referring to the parent/children of a single node is confusing. I am okay with something like strip or simplify (or the noun versions).

CarloLucibello commented 7 months ago

fstructure feels consistent for this.