Skip to content
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

Forward Typedefs #67

Open
xlauko opened this issue Feb 14, 2022 · 0 comments
Open

Forward Typedefs #67

xlauko opened this issue Feb 14, 2022 · 0 comments

Comments

@xlauko
Copy link
Member

xlauko commented Feb 14, 2022

Allow use of a typedef in an mlir document without defining it in that mlir document

  • how this means having some kind of underlying type mapping/sizing/something for it
    maybe type aliases are actually special, though, maybe I can relax on them not needing definitions
    but I'd like to be able to use them as if they were does a "hinted sizeof" and "hinted alignof" make sense?
  • it's a symbolic expression with a hinted concrete value
  • from an api standpoint, any time a (re)definition type if synthesized, I'd want to know an alternative, wholly crazy notion, could be that we abstract structure field access entirely by function call, but I can see how that would also be a big ask, and not necessarily any better
  • though field access by function call would have some desirable lowering and provenance-maintenance properties
    specifically, field access would operate on an opaque pointer, and so we could lower down to the llvm-like levels, where we lose the true "structure" of a structure, but more accurately maintain the access patterns
  • it'd also be interesting from an defs/use perspective of "finding everywhere a field is accessed"
    unless there is a way of using some kind of token value in place of a gep index like llvm does it?
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

1 participant