-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 74
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
provide feedback on max_iter
for extend_haplotypes
#2988
Comments
Return a dataclass consisting of the tree sequence and algorithm convergence details? Relying on side channels for info like this is tricky, I'd suggest something like
|
@hfr1tz3 has done some experiments here:
Proposal is to (a) set default to 10; and say in docstring that if speed is a concern, setting to 1 or 2 should get nearly everything; and it is possible though unlikely that it hasn't converged by 10 - re-running will verify. So: no need for a dataclass. |
Can you imagine this changing in future, e.g, using a slightly different algorithm? What if we returned those numbers of edges per iteration in the dataclass? It worry that people won't get these nuances unless the data is readily available in the result |
I can imagine it, but I don't think it's terribly likely? If we did want to do that, we'd probably give the method a new name and deprecate the old one? I'm proposing this because the numbers seem very clear that users can ignore this detail 98% of the time, and the note about speeding it up by setting |
Ah ok, I forgot this had been released and documented already. Ignore what I said then |
After #2938 goes in, we need to do something so that the user knows whether the algorithm terminated because of running out of things to do or because it ran into
max_iter
. And, give guidance in the docs about whatmax_iter
should be. I propose throwing a warning ifmax_iter
is reached; we need to do some experiments to determine a good suggested value.The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: