Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
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
[docs] document how to pass multi-value params from Python and R (fixes #4345) #4346
[docs] document how to pass multi-value params from Python and R (fixes #4345) #4346
Changes from 1 commit
687390f
5db8c6c
59cab4d
32f7997
4d80291
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
There are no files selected for viewing
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@jameslamb I'd like to keep this important doc in a consistent state. Changes proposed in this this PR are actually applicable for any
multi-***
-type parameter. We have a lot of such params, e.g.max_bin_by_feature
,cegb_penalty_feature_lazy
,cegb_penalty_feature_coupled
,categorical_feature
,label_gain
, etc. I think it will be better to write a separate paragraph about howmulti-***
params can be passed to a program, if you think there should be some clarification for this.Also, I'm against documenting internal string format for language wrappers. Actually, all params are passed via a string internally.
#4101 (comment)
I don't think we should expose this and it's better to encourage users to use native language structures to pass params.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
ok, I agree with both of these points. I'll split the unit tests part of this into a separate PR.
I definitely do. If an expert LightGBM user like @mayer79 wasn't aware (#4345 (comment)) then I think many others will be unaware or will spend time trying to figure it out from unit tests / example code.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Ok, I've changed this to just document the concept generally. I think it's ready for review.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
based on #4346 (comment), I think we're going to add general documentation on the fact that you can use a list in Python / vector in R, instead of specifically adding notes like this on each parameter. So I've reverted the changes to the specific
monotone_constraints
docs.