You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Is your feature request related to a problem? Please describe.
At present, using the not operator realizes symbolic booleans - ideally, it would produce an inverted symbolic boolean. We haven't prioritized this because booleans often end up getting used in a conditional (or with short-circuiting "and"/"or"), where they'll need to be realized anyway. That said, symbolic negation would make our branch decision heuristics more accurate (for reasons that I won't get into here), so it might be worthwhile.
Describe the solution you'd like
The not operation sadly doesn't correspond to a special method (there is no __not__() method), so it's harder to intercept. But not impossible; we also intercept behavior at the opcode level, and that could be used to preserve the symbolic boolean.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Is your feature request related to a problem? Please describe.
At present, using the
not
operator realizes symbolic booleans - ideally, it would produce an inverted symbolic boolean. We haven't prioritized this because booleans often end up getting used in a conditional (or with short-circuiting "and"/"or"), where they'll need to be realized anyway. That said, symbolic negation would make our branch decision heuristics more accurate (for reasons that I won't get into here), so it might be worthwhile.Describe the solution you'd like
The
not
operation sadly doesn't correspond to a special method (there is no__not__()
method), so it's harder to intercept. But not impossible; we also intercept behavior at the opcode level, and that could be used to preserve the symbolic boolean.The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: