fix: Core.transform API and uses
#1512
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
Kha
commented
Aug 25, 2022
| @@ -1297,7 +1297,7 @@ If `useZeta = true`, then `let`-expressions are visited. That is, it assumes | |||
| that zeta-reduction (aka let-expansion) is going to be used. | |||
| -/ | |||
| def isHeadBetaTarget (e : Expr) (useZeta := false) : Bool := | |||
| e.getAppFn.isHeadBetaTargetFn useZeta | |||
| e.isApp && e.getAppFn.isHeadBetaTargetFn useZeta | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Necessary change to ensure termination of if isHeadBetaTarget e then .visit e.headBeta ... uses
|
!bench |
|
Here are the benchmark results for commit e39ea0b. |
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Core.transform's docs forprecurrently sayThis description is ambiguous: is
sNewpassed topreagain, or do we only visit its children (which is the correct thing to do for the default implementation of returning.visit s)? The current implementation does the latter, but multiple use sites assume it is the former (I stopped further investigating after isolating the first two such bugs).This PR separates the two interpretations into two distinct
TransformStepconstructors, fixing the two isolated bugs and possibly more.