xdsl: Use type annotations in PyRDL

[math-fehr]

This PR updates PyRDL to use type annotations.
This should greatly reduce the amount of PyRight type checking errors.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Base: 88.53% // Head: 88.61% // Increases project coverage by +0.07% 🎉

Coverage data is based on head (9cd48a2) compared to base (b09e94e).
Patch coverage: 94.52% of modified lines in pull request are covered.

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main     #338      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   88.53%   88.61%   +0.07%     
==========================================
  Files          65       65              
  Lines        8017     8054      +37     
  Branches     1270     1278       +8     
==========================================
+ Hits         7098     7137      +39     
+ Misses        660      658       -2     
  Partials      259      259              

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
xdsl/frontend/symref.py	0.00% <0.00%> (ø)
xdsl/irdl.py	86.00% <94.44%> (+1.17%)	⬆️
tests/test_irdl.py	96.29% <100.00%> (ø)
tests/test_mlir_printer.py	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
tests/test_operation_builder.py	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
tests/test_operation_definition.py	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
tests/test_ssavalue.py	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
xdsl/dialects/affine.py	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
xdsl/dialects/arith.py	94.63% <100.00%> (ø)
xdsl/dialects/builtin.py	82.57% <100.00%> (ø)
... and 6 more

Help us with your feedback. Take ten seconds to tell us how you rate us. Have a feature suggestion? Share it here.

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

[review-notebook-app]

Check out this pull request on 

See visual diffs & provide feedback on Jupyter Notebooks.

---

Powered by ReviewNB

[math-fehr]

Note that this doesn't remove as much PyRight errors as we thought, since the main Pyright errors are from operands and results.

[math-fehr]

I changed the names for attribute definitions, since we cannot use AttributeDef anymore.
I renamed it OpAttr, to follow OpResult, though I agree this is poor naming.
I don't have a good option in mind though

[superlopuh]

LGTM!

[webmiche]

LGTM!

I feel like an example that now works would be cool, but I guess that is mainly visible in the pyright CI as well as the IDE support.

[webmiche]

We need to think about this naming.

1. it sounds bad.
2. do we want attributes that can only be attached to ops (OpAttr sounds like it).

Maybe AttrAnnotation, Attribute, AttributeAnnot. This is very hard and I feel my names are bad aswell 😅

[math-fehr]

So the annotations should be private for the users, and are just used for introspection.
We sadly cannot use Attribute, because this class has to be different than Attribute.
I went with OpAttr since we have OpResult, but yeah that's ugly especially with OptOpAttr.

[superlopuh]

It would be nice to get this in as I rely on some of the bug fixes in this PR for Chapter 2 of the tutorial. Would it be ok if I addressed the comments on this PR while Mathieu is on holiday?

[math-fehr]

I think all comments should be addressed now, besides the naming one which no one seems to have a good idea :/

[math-fehr]

I'll let you decide what to do with this PR, but for me I'm fine to merge it now, and maybe think more of better naming for later?

[superlopuh]

We have Find/Replace for naming, I think the type names are fine :)

[webmiche]

Yes sure, let's merge it and fix the naming another day.