simply Union inside UnionAll inside Union during construction #49279
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
vtjnash
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Apr 7, 2023
We observed a case where simple_tmeet made a Union of egal things, which
is undesirable. There also was no sorting of the result, as it normally
done, and theoretically, simplification with an omit_bad_union to remove
`S` could similar result in a Union that should be further simplified to
remove redundancies.
```
Union{Union{Val{T}, S} where T<:AbstractString, Union{Val{T}, Int64} where T<:AbstractString} where S
```
(In principle, that simplification might also be possible to do during
the original jl_type_union call when flattening it: see #49279)
vtjnash
force-pushed
the
jn/flatten-union-unionall-union
branch
from
705addf
to
139e8a2
Compare
Allows more opporutunities to discover (and eliminate) repeated components, as well as helping to separate the UnionAll variables into separate domains for subtyping's separability analysis.
vtjnash
force-pushed
the
jn/flatten-union-unionall-union
branch
from
139e8a2
to
425fb6e
Compare
vtjnash
added
the
status:merge me
Xnartharax
pushed a commit
to Xnartharax/julia
that referenced
this pull request
Apr 19, 2023
We observed a case where simple_tmeet made a Union of egal things, which
is undesirable. There also was no sorting of the result, as it normally
done, and theoretically, simplification with an omit_bad_union to remove
`S` could similar result in a Union that should be further simplified to
remove redundancies.
```
Union{Union{Val{T}, S} where T<:AbstractString, Union{Val{T}, Int64} where T<:AbstractString} where S
```
(In principle, that simplification might also be possible to do during
the original jl_type_union call when flattening it: see JuliaLang#49279)
Xnartharax
pushed a commit
to Xnartharax/julia
that referenced
this pull request
Apr 19, 2023
…ang#49279) Allows more opporutunities to discover (and eliminate) repeated components, as well as helping to separate the UnionAll variables into separate domains for subtyping's separability analysis.
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.
Allows more opporutunities to discover (and eliminate) repeated components, as well as helping to separate the UnionAll variables into separate domains for subtyping's separability analysis.
(waiting for #49278 before merging this)