core: Honour safe erase in rewriter.earse_op

[kingiler]

Address #1128

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Patch coverage: 100.00% and project coverage change: +0.01 🎉

Comparison is base (adfc0ef) 88.93% compared to head (9415d06) 88.94%.

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #1241      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   88.93%   88.94%   +0.01%     
==========================================
  Files         175      175              
  Lines       23642    23657      +15     
  Branches     3587     3588       +1     
==========================================
+ Hits        21026    21042      +16     
+ Misses       2044     2043       -1     
  Partials      572      572              

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
tests/test_rewriter.py	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
xdsl/pattern_rewriter.py	73.40% <100.00%> (ø)

... and 1 file with indirect coverage changes

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Do you have feedback about the report comment? Let us know in this issue.

[AntonLydike]

Thanks for this! Could you add a regression test for this? Maybe the example from the issue itself? It's always good to add testcases that were missed previously!

[math-fehr]

Yes perfect, can you write a test that was failing before but working now?

[kingiler]

I am asking the one who create the issue for a MWE. Or anyone can come up with a MWE as I personally do not come into this problem before.

[math-fehr]

In a program like:

%0 = "test.op"() : () -> i32
%1 = "test.op"(%0) : (i32) -> ()

Removing the first operation with "safe_erase=False" should fail on the previous commit, but succeed after this one.

[kingiler]

@math-fehr @AntonLydike , test case added, should be okay?