Open etotheipluspi opened 7 years ago
I'm okay with either.
My gut feeling is that the flag is adequate since most of the functionality and options are the same. Actually I didn't think too much about this for MCTS. It may have been better to do dpw with a flag.
Currently, the solver only supports Gauss-Siedel value iteration. We should have an optional flag to do value iteration without the Gauss-Siedel method if the user wishes. There are a few ways to do this. The two most straightforward ways:
Have two different solver types with their respective solve functions
Have a flag that looks something like
gauss_siedel::Bool
as a field in the currentValueIterationSolver
type without adding another type orsolve()
function.Can this be done more elegantly? @zsunberg if I recall you were dealing with something similar to this in MCTS, any input here?