You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
I'm assuming it becomes a decision of the dialect conversion which underlying standard type to use, perhaps using the native type of the underlying hardware (word size, FPR width, etc).
However, MLIR (and LLVM) use i1 to represent boolean values, and without a direct boolean type in Rise or a way to define bit-width, it's impossible to represent boolean values in Rise.
If/once conditionals are introduced as a first-class citizen, boolean values would be required. In that case, I'd assume creating a new BoolType would make more sense than allowing IntType to define the bit-width.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Types don't seem to have fixed sizes in Rise.
I'm assuming it becomes a decision of the dialect conversion which underlying standard type to use, perhaps using the native type of the underlying hardware (word size, FPR width, etc).
However, MLIR (and LLVM) use i1 to represent boolean values, and without a direct boolean type in Rise or a way to define bit-width, it's impossible to represent boolean values in Rise.
If/once conditionals are introduced as a first-class citizen, boolean values would be required. In that case, I'd assume creating a new
BoolType
would make more sense than allowingIntType
to define the bit-width.The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: