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
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?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Allow use of a typedef in an mlir document without defining it in that mlir document
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?
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
unless there is a way of using some kind of token value in place of a gep index like llvm does it?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: