Open
Conversation
Collaborator
|
In #908 I saw that Xor.negate imports recurse_negate instead of doing ~self.args[0]. Is it in the contract of negate() that it should not introduce a negation itself? If so, can this be documented somehwere (e.g. in globalconstraints doc where 'optionally, can implement negate')? |
This file contains hidden or 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
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
Refactored push_down_negation transformation in similar spirit to recent rewrites of safening and decompose.
Returns a flag whether some of the expressions are changed, so eliminates any redundant copying of the argument (which was actually a todo in the original implementation)
Also added an optimization where Boolean variables are chosen to be negated instead of an expression when simplifying
BExpr != BV.I'm not sure about keeping the toplevel flag, but it's required as flatten expects a list of constraints without toplevel
ands...