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
In many cases we have been able to rewrite such Lift programs differently to make them work in Rise with access annotations. However, in this case it does not seem possible.
What should we do about it?
Should we make toMem more flexible, maybe by accepting a memory layout: toMem: {t: DataType} -> (a: AddrSpaceLayout[t]) -> exp[t, wr] -> exp[t, rd]?
Should patterns like mapSeq/mapLocal be allowed to be read -> read instead of read -> write? Would that require changing how memory is allocated? (i.e hoisting allocations outside of loops)
Example from #220:
In many cases we have been able to rewrite such Lift programs differently to make them work in Rise with access annotations. However, in this case it does not seem possible.
What should we do about it?
Should we make
toMem
more flexible, maybe by accepting a memory layout:toMem: {t: DataType} -> (a: AddrSpaceLayout[t]) -> exp[t, wr] -> exp[t, rd]
?Should patterns like
mapSeq
/mapLocal
be allowed to beread -> read
instead ofread -> write
? Would that require changing how memory is allocated? (i.e hoisting allocations outside of loops)cc @bastian-koepcke
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: