Jonathan Malmaud
Jonathan Malmaud
Let's document it somewhere before closing.
I think you're right; the docker image needs to be updated.
Sorry for the delay, @askrix. These actually look really good! We need some kind of test, even if it's informal, to make sure these work. I propose adding tests that...
Thanks! For now, they do. Google plans to eventually enable creating new operations on the fly from C (see https://github.com/tensorflow/tensorflow/blob/master/tensorflow/c/c_api.h#L922), at which point it should be possible to define new...
Sure. On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 1:05 PM Jingpeng Wu wrote: > cool! thanks for the quick response. we can keep this issue here to track > this capability?...
There are a few practical problems with defining an atomic TensorFlow operator for arbitrary Julia functions: * We would need to distribute custom TensorFlow binaries if we want to use...
Yes, someone this weekend. On Fri, Apr 27, 2018 at 12:25 AM Lyndon White wrote: > This looks good to me. > @malmaud can you give this a once over?...
LGTM. Seems to be a a conflict now though.
@gustafsson Are you interested in rebasing this on the current TensorFlow.jl master?
Having only looked at the error in the OP, should we be defining `start(::TensorRange)`, @oxinabox ?