Skip to content
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

Datapoint -> VisionTensor; datapoint[s] -> vision_tensor[s] #7895

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

NicolasHug
Copy link
Member

@NicolasHug NicolasHug commented Aug 29, 2023

Alternative to #7894

@pytorch-bot
Copy link

pytorch-bot bot commented Aug 29, 2023

🔗 Helpful Links

🧪 See artifacts and rendered test results at hud.pytorch.org/pr/pytorch/vision/7895

Note: Links to docs will display an error until the docs builds have been completed.

✅ You can merge normally! (1 Unrelated Failure)

As of commit e27ac58 with merge base 655ebdb (image):

FLAKY - The following job failed but was likely due to flakiness present on trunk:

This comment was automatically generated by Dr. CI and updates every 15 minutes.

@@ -86,7 +86,7 @@
print("PTS for first five frames ", ptss[:5])
print("Total number of frames: ", len(frames))
approx_nf = metadata['audio']['duration'][0] * metadata['audio']['framerate'][0]
print("Approx total number of datapoints we can expect: ", approx_nf)
print("Approx total number of vision_tensors we can expect: ", approx_nf)
Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

will revert

dispatch their inputs to the appropriate lower-level kernels. Most users do not
need to manipulate datapoints directly and can simply rely on dataset wrapping -
need to manipulate vision_tensors directly and can simply rely on dataset wrapping -
Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Occurrences like this "vision_tensors" one should probably become "VisionTensors". But this can be done in a follow-up PR that cleans the docs

Copy link
Collaborator

@pmeier pmeier left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Ok with this if we don't find consensus for #7894. Still, slight preference for #7894 over this one.

@NicolasHug
Copy link
Member Author

Closed by #7894

@NicolasHug NicolasHug closed this Aug 30, 2023
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants