Remove nat magic #3184
Draft
Remove nat magic #3184
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
mattpolzin
reviewed
Jan 1, 2024
mattpolzin
reviewed
Jan 1, 2024
| -- TODO: next release remove this and use %builtin pragma | ||
| natHack : List Magic | ||
| natHack = | ||
| [ MagicCRef (NS typesNS (UN $ Basic "natToInteger")) 1 (\ _, _, [k] => k) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This makes Nat -> integer a no-op right? Is that optimization captured anymore once this code is removed?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yes that optimisation is captured already by a different, much more general optimisation I added.
Co-authored-by: Mathew Polzin <matt.polzin@gmail.com>
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Description
Remove compiler magic around
Nat.This uses
%transformrules, which are currently fragile (see #3183) so it doesn't work currently.Once that issue is fixed, then this should work well.
Should this change go in the CHANGELOG?
Yes, I will do this later
implementation, I have updated
CHANGELOG.md(and potentially alsoCONTRIBUTORS.md).