I'm a bit hesitant to comment here, but it looks like the PR from this discussion is stalled. I wonder if part of that is that the RelayViz abstraction is too ambitious at this point.
I got to this question after I have been looking at adapting the visualization from the starting from the PR and after the first three changes, I moved to merging the two steps again, because I felt like I was writing everything twice. - RelayViz came about as a way to separate data representation and rendering. However, as far we are relay-specific, I cannot help but feel that the relay graph already is already a representation, just not a serialization format. - Now, having a json-based serialization format is nice and I can see how a visualizer would make use of that if it were available. However, I also feel that developing both at the same time is only worth if one reduces the total number of converters needed. - If we have a serialization format covering N frameworks instead of "just relay" and M visualizers, we would have N * M potential conversions and a common intermediate would reduce the converters needed from N * M to N + M. Clearly that would be worth having. - If we just have relay, so N = 1, we need 1 + M and for the first visualizer it is 1 + 1, "twice the work" of writing just the visualizer. - My experience (from writing visualizers for both sides of the the PyTorch frontend) seems to be that they are different enough (or the features I was looking for were different enough) that an intermediate representation covering both to a large degree (rather than bing the equivalent of just running through the PyTorch frontend and then visualizing the resulting relay) increases the effort significantly and introduces all sorts of things we don't really need for relay visualizations. So while I think that RelayViz is a neat idea, it would seem that most people interested in visualization want it for the other things they're working on, and perhaps the RelayViz design is making it too large a project for people with other priorities. Again, I don't want to keep anyone from working on a more proper solution but rather highlight some cost-benefit considerations I met when looking at this. I just wanted to share some observation of what happened when I started to look into whether I could revive the PR and then found that it would be too large for me. I've been wondering if maybe having visualization directly from the relay graph objects is worth having until we have some more experience of what we look for when visualizing the graph. Best regards Thomas --- [Visit Topic](https://discuss.tvm.ai/t/rfc-visualizing-relay-program-as-graph/4825/16) to respond. You are receiving this because you enabled mailing list mode. To unsubscribe from these emails, [click here](https://discuss.tvm.ai/email/unsubscribe/4d0c8b1ebb819fa78f1f9a2f686b7ad98aeb9b977d1121248019a7c17c135059).
