Skip to content
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

Improve warning wordings #4731

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Oct 28, 2021
Merged

Improve warning wordings #4731

merged 3 commits into from
Oct 28, 2021

Conversation

StrikerRUS
Copy link
Collaborator

Refer to #4724 (review).

@hzy46
Also, IMHO these two messages look contradictory:

Log::Info("Recommend use integer for label index when loading data from binary for sanity check.");

Log::Warning("Config label_column works only in case of loading data directly from text file. It will be ignored when loading from binary file.");

Copy link
Collaborator

@jameslamb jameslamb left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This looks good to me, thank you!

@StrikerRUS
Copy link
Collaborator Author

@hzy46 Could you please take a look at this?

Also, IMHO these two messages look contradictory:
#4731 (comment)

It seems to me suggesting using integer values for label index and then clarifying that any values will be simply ignored doesn't make a lot of sense. WDYT?

}

if (config_.label_column != "") {
Log::Warning("Config label_column works only in case of loading data directly from text file. It will be ignored when loading from binary file.");
Log::Warning("Parameter label_column works only in case of loading data directly from text file. It will be ignored when loading from binary file.");
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@hzy46 Could you please take a look at this?

Also, IMHO these two messages look contradictory:
#4731 (comment)

It seems to me suggesting using integer values for label index and then clarifying that any values will be simply ignored doesn't make a lot of sense. WDYT?

For this case, maybe we can just skip the check for that label_idx_ is consistent? Since warning for a non-empty label_column is given subsequently here anyway.

Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Sounds reasonable to me. Can we make this in a follow-up PR to leave this one focused only on wordings?

Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Sure.

@github-actions
Copy link

This pull request has been automatically locked since there has not been any recent activity since it was closed. To start a new related discussion, open a new issue at https://github.com/microsoft/LightGBM/issues including a reference to this.

@github-actions github-actions bot locked as resolved and limited conversation to collaborators Aug 23, 2023
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants