Refactor existance proofs, fixing bugs in the process #332
Conversation
This file contains 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
|
Since this is getting messy, and since analysis are super hard to support, I'm in favor of deleting existence explanations from egg. |
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
This PR refactors explanations and existance proofs to prevent them running into contradictions.
The main change is to phase the instantiations of the LHS of rules with the actual application of those rules. This allows the
memoto remain up-to-date, and keeps a consistent view of the egraph for that iteration.The API for appliers has changed slightly. In explanations mode, the applier is given a particular term for the left hand side of the rewrite instead of an eclass id. This elegantly solves the phasing problem.