mxnet-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Carin Meier <>
Subject Re: [apache/incubator-mxnet] [RFC] MXNet 2.0 JVM Language development (#17783)
Date Tue, 13 Oct 2020 21:15:42 GMT
As far as my feedback for the two options: 

> 1. Go for JavaCPP solution for its better performance. The source code will also be part
of the Apache MXNet. In 2.0, we will expect the CI/CD pipeline for MXNet low level Java API.

>2. Go for JNA build pipeline to the community, it can be used out-of-box now without issue.
Similarly, the maintainance is very low and less dependencieces required. The source code
can also be donated to Apache MXNet.

They both sound reasonable and improvements to the system. Thank you both @lanking520 and
@saudet for your time and efforts. The one aspect that I haven't heard discussed is that implementation
of the base Java API - in particular if anyone is planning on tackling this? If so, the person/s
building out the dev work themselves might have a preference that would weight it one way
or the other.

You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, 7-Bit, 0 bytes)
View raw message