| 1 |
Donnie Berkholz writes: |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
> The complexity of that approach is why I suggest a simpler one that |
| 4 |
> relies on defining the format of various files, since we already know |
| 5 |
> what autotools syntax looks like, what ebuild syntax looks like, what C |
| 6 |
> source code looks like, etc. ML approaches are more useful when you |
| 7 |
> don't know the connection between inputs and outputs, but we do. On the |
| 8 |
> ebuild side of this syntax-based approach, there would be some potential |
| 9 |
> integration to another of our ongoing GSoC projects, libbash. |
| 10 |
> |
| 11 |
Agreed, I would be to great of a task for me to write it like that. |
| 12 |
Thanks for explaining how it would work though! Perhaps I will try |
| 13 |
something like that later. :) |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
About the libbash project and/or other projects: |
| 16 |
How should we collaborate during GSoC? Will there be a strong |
| 17 |
"my code, their code" line or can we help each other if we are going to |
| 18 |
use code from one of the other GSoC projects? |
Archives