Re: [apache/tvm-rfcs] [RFC] TUNIP: TVMScript Unified Printer (PR #74)

[Andrew Reusch <no...@github.com.INVALID>]

very sorry for the delay here.

@junrushao1994 i guess i'm still a little fuzzy on the rationale for why we want to have two ways to parse TVMScript. I know this is a bit bigger than just this RFC, but with this RFC we're further pushing the cart down this path so I'd like us to be explicit about why.

Relay has a single roundtrippable serialization format, as do most languages. I think we benefit from this in that we only have one set of tests to maintain.

With TIR, my understanding is that we used Python as an AST parser since language constructs in TIR somewhat closely matched to Python. I'm not sure I see why we should want to have two different ways to do this--shouldn't we just have a single way to serialize TIR and parse it that always works? It seems like we could still expose this parser to various frontends via PackedFunc.

-- 
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/apache/tvm-rfcs/pull/74#issuecomment-1150642817
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.

Message ID: <ap...@github.com>