Remove automatic extraction in builtin evaluation #282
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
In #265 (released as 9.0.0) the ability to automatically extract a builtin using a global egraph context was added. This PR removes that feature, requiring all builtins to be in a normalized form. I realized that for #241 we want facts to compare structural equality when converting to a boolean, instead of using the e-graph. Looking at that previous PR, it seems like a mistake to add this implicit context, making things more confusing and opaque with minimal UX improvements.
CodSpeed Performance ReportMerging #282 will not alter performanceComparing Summary
|
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
In #265 (released as 9.0.0) the ability to automatically extract a builtin using a global egraph context was added. This PR removes that feature, requiring all builtins to be in a normalized form.
I realized that for #241 we want facts to compare structural equality when converting to a boolean, instead of using the e-graph. Looking at that previous PR, it seems like a mistake to add this implicit context, making things more confusing and opaque with minimal UX improvements.