-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 2.3k
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
[Misc] Refactored flattend_values() to avoid potential conflicts in flattened statements #6749
Merged
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
…lattened statements
✅ Deploy Preview for docsite-preview ready!
To edit notification comments on pull requests, go to your Netlify site settings. |
strongoier
approved these changes
Nov 30, 2022
strongoier
reviewed
Nov 30, 2022
Co-authored-by: Yi Xu <[email protected]>
jim19930609
commented
Nov 30, 2022
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Code adjustment
quadpixels
pushed a commit
to quadpixels/taichi
that referenced
this pull request
May 13, 2023
…lattened statements (taichi-dev#6749) Issue: taichi-dev#5819 Overriding the flattened statement `stmt` of an `Expression` can cause conflicts, for example: ``` @ti.kernel def test(): x = ti.Vector([1, 2, 3, 4]) tmp = x + x[0] # implicit broadcast ``` In `x + x[0]`, the `x` on the lhs serves as rvalue whereas the `x` in the `x[0]` serves as a lvalue, so the result of `flatten_rvalue()` and `flatten_lvalue()` will override each other. To avoid such conflicts, this PR refactored the `flatten_values()` functions: 1. Flattened statement `stmt` of an `Expression` will only get modified by `Expression::flatten()`, any other overriding will be forbidden. 2. `flatten_rvalue()` and `flatten_lvalue()` now returns the flattened statement as the result. External users such as `irpass::lower_ast()` will turn to use the returned statement. Co-authored-by: Yi Xu <[email protected]>
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.
Issue: #5819
Overriding the flattened statement
stmt
of anExpression
can cause conflicts, for example:In
x + x[0]
, thex
on the lhs serves as rvalue whereas thex
in thex[0]
serves as a lvalue, so the result offlatten_rvalue()
andflatten_lvalue()
will override each other.To avoid such conflicts, this PR refactored the
flatten_values()
functions:stmt
of anExpression
will only get modified byExpression::flatten()
, any other overriding will be forbidden.flatten_rvalue()
andflatten_lvalue()
now returns the flattened statement as the result. External users such asirpass::lower_ast()
will turn to use the returned statement.