-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 5.8k
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
Remove redundant prerequisite steps from the default optimizer sequence #15092
base: develop
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Remove redundant prerequisite steps from the default optimizer sequence #15092
Conversation
80c293d
to
1462e34
Compare
Rebased on top of the new sequence. |
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.
We also need to update the docs with this new default sequence, right? I guess we mention it there.
No, we don't really document the default sequence. We need a changelog entry though. |
This pull request is stale because it has been open for 14 days with no activity. |
This pull request is stale because it has been open for 14 days with no activity. |
This pull request is stale because it has been open for 14 days with no activity. |
This pull request is stale because it has been open for 14 days with no activity. |
This pull request is stale because it has been open for 14 days with no activity. |
This pull request is stale because it has been open for 14 days with no activity. |
This pull request is stale because it has been open for 14 days with no activity. |
This pull request is stale because it has been open for 14 days with no activity. |
This pull request is stale because it has been open for 14 days with no activity. |
This pull request is stale because it has been open for 14 days with no activity. |
Since
gho
steps are hard-coded as prerequisites, there's not much point in having them in the default sequence. All other steps are supposed to preserve these properties.For now this is just to verify that removing them does not really change generated bytecode in a meaningful way.
If this is true, we might consider merging it, though that would probably be better done only after rebasing it on the new sequence (#15030). Otherwise merging it would just revert it.