-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 2.7k
ChineseHeadFinder: dictionary key 'INTJ' repeated with different values #1370
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
Comments
Clearly a bug, as it is clobbering the old entry, which was
The new entry makes it left headed (except for punct). Do you have any insight into which is better? In CTB 5.1, all
except for this, which would appear to be a mistake based on the bracketing of the punctuation:
I don't have CTB 9 lying around, but I will ask the people in charge of such things to put it on our cluster. |
Thanks for the quick response! I must admit that I don't have prior knowledge about CTB (and I don't have the CTB 9 neither). Therefore, I am unable to determine which value is better😔. |
Ok, I can see why the new rule is left headed. There are a bunch of INTJ
like this:
嗯 嗯 嗯
also one of
我的天 哪
and a whole lot where the entire sentence is a single word with a
punctuation, and it is all included in the INTJ
Guess the right answer is to just get rid of the old rule. Thanks for
pointing this out!
…On Thu, Jul 6, 2023 at 4:37 PM TAN Long ***@***.***> wrote:
Thanks for the quick response!
I must admit that I don't have prior knowledge about CTB (and I don't have
the CTB 9 neither). Therefore, I am unable to determine which value is
better😔.
—
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#1370 (comment)>,
or unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AA2AYWMWXUFJQGDLO4HTEGTXO4OW7ANCNFSM6AAAAAA2A2G5YY>
.
You are receiving this because you commented.Message ID:
***@***.***>
|
In
ChineseHeadFinder.java
, the key "INTJ" is duplicated with different values, at line 57 and line 101.Is this duplication a bug or intended behavior? Sorry for the inconvenience if it is intended.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: