-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 54
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
No warning on checking unintroduced variables #346
Comments
Was this fixed by #344? |
I was also getting this issue online and locally with the version I built from main today. |
Oh that's the behavior I expected. |
Perhaps we could improve the documentation or issue a warning, as suggested? |
I am not familiar with the inner working off egglog so take this with a grain of salt but naïvely I would think a warning should be issued when running check if there is a term within the checked expressions that is not in the database |
That's a good idea- we could detect when there's a term with no pattern variables in it. |
Yeah, the current behavior is useful when you want to check whether a certain tuple is in the database (e.g., a tuple that would only be added when something is violated). |
That makes sense, however, I think a warning would still make sense especially for new users. Advanced users who desire this behavior can then ignore/suppress this warning |
Current behavior
When trying to check two variables that have not been introduced the egraph manually the check quietly fails.
Example:
This can be fixed by explicitly adding the node to the egraph
(Thanks @saulshanabrook)
Expected behavior
It would be great if either the nodes could be implicitly introduced to the egraph or if there would be at least a warning informing the user about this potential issue
(from https://egraphs.zulipchat.com/#narrow/stream/375765-egg.2Fegglog/topic/First.20time.20user.20of.20python.20bindings/near/421896795)
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: