From 4955a3d76a535fad2a3f9e504f2eeeefc0a266fd Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: graehl Date: Mon, 5 Jul 2010 18:53:00 +0000 Subject: comment unused var names, todo git-svn-id: https://ws10smt.googlecode.com/svn/trunk@133 ec762483-ff6d-05da-a07a-a48fb63a330f --- decoder/hg.cc | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) (limited to 'decoder/hg.cc') diff --git a/decoder/hg.cc b/decoder/hg.cc index e57f7807..70511c07 100644 --- a/decoder/hg.cc +++ b/decoder/hg.cc @@ -1,4 +1,4 @@ -//TODO: lazily generate feature vectors for hyperarcs (because some of them will be pruned). this means 1) storing ref to rule for those features 2) providing ff interface for regenerating its feature vector from hyperedge+states and probably 3) still caching feat. vect on hyperedge once it's been generated. ff would normally just contribute its weighted score and result state, not component features. +//TODO: lazily generate feature vectors for hyperarcs (because some of them will be pruned). this means 1) storing ref to rule for those features 2) providing ff interface for regenerating its feature vector from hyperedge+states and probably 3) still caching feat. vect on hyperedge once it's been generated. ff would normally just contribute its weighted score and result state, not component features. however, the hypergraph drops the state used by ffs after rescoring is done, so recomputation would have to start at the leaves and work bottom up. question: which takes more space, feature id+value, or state? #include "hg.h" -- cgit v1.2.3