-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 19
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
Add getparameters
and setparameters!!
#86
Merged
Merged
Changes from 1 commit
Commits
Show all changes
24 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
e2bdfb7
added state_from_transition, parameters and setparameters!!
torfjelde 7fa8de0
Update src/AbstractMCMC.jl
torfjelde 0a4fd17
renamed state_from_transition to updatestate!!
torfjelde 28bdf91
adhere to julia convention
torfjelde 86a7826
added docs
torfjelde e19cea7
fixed docs
torfjelde d86499f
fixed docs
torfjelde bce436d
added example for why updatestate!! is useful
torfjelde 21f4d56
improved MixtureState example
torfjelde de0e5b2
further improvements to docs
torfjelde 23b9119
renamed parameters and setparameters!! to values and setvalues!!
torfjelde b9f476c
fixed typo in docs
torfjelde f7b6096
fixed documenting values
torfjelde 4ca57b0
improved and fixed some bugs in docs
torfjelde abebd59
fixed typo in docs
torfjelde d1d4642
renamed values and setvalues!! to realize and realize!!
torfjelde c6c9554
added model to updatestate!!
torfjelde d9f8585
Merge branch 'master' into tor/state-transition-related
torfjelde 600d36c
Apply suggestions from code review
torfjelde 1bfbef1
Update docs/src/api.md
torfjelde d9480d1
Apply suggestions from code review
torfjelde 3f861bf
Merge branch 'master' into tor/state-transition-related
torfjelde ddb588c
Update docs/src/api.md
torfjelde d6ab10a
version bump
sunxd3 File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This one seems a bit confusing - so one already needs a
state
to return it? Based on the name I would have assumed a function signaturestate_from_transition(transition) -> state
.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Well if you already have the state, wouldn't it just be an identity call? i.e.
You could just dispatch to a different
state
type. For example,state=nothing
would try to reconstruct the state from the transitions. Maybe? Not sure. Perhaps I am just playing devils advocate here.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Hmm, maybe
update_from_transition!!(state, transition_prev, state_prev)
is more descriptive?There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Yo, whadda yah guys think?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Oh, sorry, my bad. Yeah your proposed name change is clearer, let's do that.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Or maybe just
update!!
? Given that we might also want to pass instate_prev
?There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Yeah, since we don't want to export any of these functions anyway I'm fine with
update!!
. Is a bit nicer thanupdate_from_transition!!
IMO, and as you say we might not only update based on the transition.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Cool, I'll make that change then 👍