-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 217
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Finalize #334
Merged
Merged
Finalize #334
Changes from 6 commits
Commits
Show all changes
10 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
27f8b80
finalize method
npwardberkeley 31a16cd
setter/getter, and wrapprs in ConstraintSystemRef
npwardberkeley 4c4ad1c
style
npwardberkeley afd19bb
incorporate comments
npwardberkeley 974ef4f
constraints as default optimization goal
npwardberkeley 32e5206
remove reduce_constraint_weight
npwardberkeley a31f000
None still inlines
npwardberkeley 7f9ef99
export OptimizationGoal; add assertion checks
weikengchen b58393a
retouch the comments
weikengchen 9de6b0c
update the changelog
weikengchen File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
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
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
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Should we have a
None
here, which will do no optimization passes?There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
That makes sense. Do you think
None
, orConstraints
, should be the default?There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think constraints should be the default
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
What are the semantics of calling finalize with None? In the end we have to get rid of all SymbolicLC before converting to matrices
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think
None
would still need to inline Symbolic LC (self.inline_all_lcs()
, without whichto_matrices
would fail.Dev, what do you think? Basically, at this moment,
None
would be the same asConstraints
, and it is uncertain if in the future we will treat them differently.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think given that no specific use cases pop up for
None
, and we currently do not have a good idea of faster inlining (without optimization to reduce constraints), maybe we can omitNone
and add it later. Dev, what do you think?There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Sounds good to me!
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Actually, I do think
None
is still useful, in that it could just make far fewer symbolic LC's for memory reduction. E.g. when multiplying by a constant, we don't need to make a new symbolic LC if we don't care about optimizationsThere was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
And we could have drop semantics to symbolic LC's to remove intermediate variables from the map as soon as they're dropped from memory. It is a significant engineering effort though, so maybe not worth having it now. (Its non breaking to add it later)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
That makes sense. Then let us keep
None
and, for now, letNone
also doinline_all_lcs
. More changes may be coming in the future.