Closed mariusmjp closed 2 years ago
Look at this discussion: https://discourse.julialang.org/t/a-future-for-jld2/42958/37 The future of JLD2 is uncertain. Do you still think that using JLD2 is a good idea?
Yes I also see the same concern before but the question is which format we should use ? Because it seems all pre-existing format have some limitation and it seems JLD2 is the most faster: https://discourse.julialang.org/t/a-future-for-jld2/42958 see the first comment in the forum. Also when I go to repository of JLD2 it seems the package is activate again after a really long pause please see read me at https://github.com/JuliaIO/JLD2.jl but I'm agree with you the future seem uncertain.
Sorry for reviving this thread. Would BSON.jl work for your application? It also save closures/anonymous functions. Some idiosyncrasies:
For nested arrays, BSON.jl saves it as an array of datatype Any
's. You'll need to do convert()
yourself when loading from such a BSON file.
If the anonymous function in a BSON file contains a package, then the user who loads the BSON file should have the same version of that package loaded in scope. Example: If a BSON file has a variable for f = xx->MyPack.myfunc(xx)+3
, then when loading the file, the user must have done import MyPack
, whereMyPack
must be the same version as the MyPack
for f
when f
was saved.
I'm not sure that we'll ever support JLD2 or any other format for plans. As of f2d962022c69ddc3b1b9e9b4b5aacfff140fc4d4 we now have importplan
and exportplan
, which use a text format so that plans with the same model and range can also be compared visually with plain diff.
Hi,
I noticed an issue when I tried to save plan in JLD2 and reload it after (please see the following snapshot).