Hi Yann,
Sorry, I am replying to my last email because I managed to deleted the
last email from you by mistake.
So yes, I think your commit 93b86c587acce8 ("Fix error detection for seq()
composition") fixes the problem.
Just in case, IIUC this "breaks" another special case,
seq(i, 1, wh
Should be fixed in version 2.48.1.
Yann
Le sam. 3 sept. 2022 à 10:05, Yann Orlarey a écrit :
> Hi Oleg,
>
> You are perfectly right! For seq, we have to check that ins(f)==outs(f)
> and indicate a typing error otherwise. In addition, there is a bug when
> using abstractions. They must be transf
Hi Oleg,
You are perfectly right! For seq, we have to check that ins(f)==outs(f) and
indicate a typing error otherwise. In addition, there is a bug when using
abstractions. They must be transformed into circuits before they can be
queried for their number of inputs and outputs.
Thanks for discove
On 09/02, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
>
> Hmm... but I don't understand what exactly the new neutralExpSeq() function
> does... Say,
>
> f = _,_;
> seq0 = seq(i,0,f);
> process = inputs(seq0), outputs(seq0);
>
> outputs 2,2. Good. However,
>
> f = _,_ :> _;
> or
> f = +;
>
>
