mir_tuple_value
#1934
Merged
mir_tuple_value
#1934
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This adds support for a `mir_tuple_value` function in the MIR backend, which allows constructing tuple `SetupValue`s. This is distinct from the notion of structs in MIR, so there are now separate `SetupStruct` and `SetupTuple` constructors for `SetupValue` to encode this distinction. At the moment, only the MIR backend makes use of `SetupTuple`s, and they are not used at all in the LLVM or JVM backends. In the SAW remote API, the `"tuple"` type of `setup value` previously referred to `SetupStruct`s, but this becomes especially confusing when SAW supports both structs _and_ tuples. There are now separate `"struct"` and `"tuple"` `setup value`s to properly tell them apart. This checks off one box in #1859.
RyanGlScott
force-pushed
the
T1859-mir_tuple_value
branch
from
208ef12 to
124709b
Compare
spernsteiner
approved these changes
Sep 11, 2023
Comment on lines
+20
to
+22
| * The old `"tuple"` `setup value` has been renamed to `"struct"`. This better | ||
| reflects its intended purpose of representing struct values. There is now a | ||
| new `"tuple"` `setup value` that is only used to represent MIR tuples. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Just to confirm - this is not a user-facing change, right? It looks like the Python API was using the name struct/StructVal for the thing that was internally called "tuple", and only the internal name has changed.
I was going to ask whether users who forgot to update their scripts would get a useful error message, but if the Python API is actually unchanged, then it's a moot point.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Correct, the Python API remains unchanged. The only way this could break anything is if there are any other libraries out there somewhere that interface with the SAW remote API, but I'm not aware of any such libraries.
RyanGlScott
added
the
PR: ready to merge
29 tasks
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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.
This adds support for a
mir_tuple_valuefunction in the MIR backend, which allows constructing tupleSetupValues. This is distinct from the notion of structs in MIR, so there are now separateSetupStructandSetupTupleconstructors forSetupValueto encode this distinction. At the moment, only the MIR backend makes use ofSetupTuples, and they are not used at all in the LLVM or JVM backends.In the SAW remote API, the
"tuple"type ofsetup valuepreviously referred toSetupStructs, but this becomes especially confusing when SAW supports both structs and tuples. There are now separate"struct"and"tuple"setup values to properly tell them apart.This checks off one box in #1859.