Issue555

Issues
Show Unassigned
Show All
Search

Login




Register
Lost your login?

Help
Roundup docs

Title Use new task interface in h^m heuristic
Priority feature Status resolved
Superseder Nosy List florian, jendrik, malte, manuel
Assigned To manuel Keywords
Optional summary 


















Created on 2015-07-15.11:55:06 by florian, last changed  by malte.








 
Messages

 
  

   msg4695 (view)
   Author: malte
   Date: 2015-10-29.11:43:14
   
    
   
  

  

   
    
Oops, sorry for accidentally using the summary field. If we don't get used to it
soon, I guess we need to improve the UI a bit.

   		
  

 
 
  

   msg4694 (view)
   Author: jendrik
   Date: 2015-10-29.11:39:04
   
    
   
  

  

   
    
Obviously, there's much more one could do to improve the code, but I think this 
should be part of a more general rewrite of the h^m heuristic.

   		
  

 
 
  

   msg4690 (view)
   Author: manuel
   Date: 2015-10-29.10:25:25
   
    
   
  

  

   
    
The h^m heuristic now uses the task that implements the TaskProxy interface.
Additionally, the code was enriched with c++11 features.

The benchmark result shows a slightly improved overall performance:
http://ai.cs.unibas.ch/_tmp_files/heusner/issue555-issue555-v2-issue555-base-issue555-v2-compare.html

   		
  

 
 
  

   msg4373 (view)
   Author: florian
   Date: 2015-07-15.11:55:06
   
    
   
  

  

   
    
The h^m should use the task it get from the options object (as a TaskProxy)
instead of the global task.

   		
  

 





History


Date
User
Action
Args



2015-10-29 11:43:14maltesetmessages:
  + msg4695
summary: Very good! Has someone performed a code review before merging? We usually do a
code review for all nontrivial issues before merging. (I know Jendrik looked at
the previous version.)

Yes, Jendrik also looked at the very last version before I closed and merged 
the
branch. -> 


2015-10-29 11:39:04jendriksetmessages:
  + msg4694
summary: Very good! Has someone performed a code review before merging? We usually do a
code review for all nontrivial issues before merging. (I know Jendrik looked at
the previous version.)

Yes, Jendrik also looked at the very last version before I closed and merged the
branch. -> Very good! Has someone performed a code review before merging? We usually do a
code review for all nontrivial issues before merging. (I know Jendrik looked at
the previous version.)

Yes, Jendrik also looked at the very last version before I closed and merged 
the
branch.


2015-10-29 11:34:27manuelsetsummary: Very good! Has someone performed a code review before merging? We usually do a
code review for all nontrivial issues before merging. (I know Jendrik looked at
the previous version.) -> Very good! Has someone performed a code review before merging? We usually do a
code review for all nontrivial issues before merging. (I know Jendrik looked at
the previous version.)

Yes, Jendrik also looked at the very last version before I closed and merged the
branch.


2015-10-29 11:17:51maltesetsummary: Very good! Has someone performed a code review before merging? We usually do a
code review for all nontrivial issues before merging. (I know Jendrik looked at
the previous version.)


2015-10-29 10:25:25manuelsetstatus: in-progress -> resolved
messages:
  + msg4690


2015-10-26 12:19:31manuelsetassignedto: manuel


2015-10-26 12:18:09manuelsetstatus: unread -> in-progress
nosy:
  + manuel


2015-07-15 17:17:13jendriksetnosy:
  + jendrik


2015-07-15 11:55:06floriancreate