2 ms·
The doc comment at the top of the .py file is sufficiently descriptive """Simple, minimal implementation of Mamba in one file of Numpy adapted from (1) and
by edflsafoiewq 2y ago
The doc comment at the top of the .py file is sufficiently descriptive
"""Simple, minimal implementation of Mamba in one file of Numpy adapted from (1) and inspired from (2).
Suggest reading the following before/while reading the code:
[1] Mamba: Linear-Time Sequence Modeling with Selective State Spaces (Albert Gu and Tri Dao)
https://arxiv.org/abs/2312.00752
[2] The Annotated S4 (Sasha Rush and Sidd Karamcheti)
https://srush.github.io/annotated-s4
- 1024core 2y ago> The doc comment at the top of the .py file is sufficiently descriptive Which is the purpose of these doc comments. If you have the time to gripe on HN, you have the time to click on the link and do some reading. The "Usage" section in the link above is enough to help one disambiguate; if not, then there's always the doc comment.
- exe34 2y agoi believe the gripe is a plea for others not to do the same thing, and instead to put some thought into presentation. the gripe is not about the specific case. if the poster is anything like me, if the first ten words of your post don't make sense to me, I'm just moving on to something else.
- mint2 2y agoNo, I can see the commenters frustration. Unless one is versed in Llm space, one is more likely to know mamba as the package manager and find the headline and also the GitHub page confusing. The markdown read me is supposed to provide the info the commenter wanted. Even that first line you posted is unhelpfully circular, defining mamba as an implementation of mamba. Call me old fashioned, but a best practice read me should concisely provide: what the thing is, and why it is, aka the problem it solves. (And not with circular definition.)
- ktm5j 2y agoOkay, so why not just put that in the readme??