-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 3.4k
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
[RUST] RFC and 0.5 Release Plans #2306
Comments
Here're my thoughts about a The main difference (besides some conversions and using a fat point) between frontend and runtime Because bindgen doesn't work for runtime, so either we should
|
@nhynes I'm working on the common crate and it's completely non-obvious how to make it. I'm making minimum assumptions like even removing the debugging for I'm now thinking maybe common crate is not a good idea here and we can have exactly the same functionalities with two different implementations because runtime and frontend needs are different when we include debugging for example. Note that this includes very basic value conversions API only and it's not significant. Overall, I'll work on making a common crate this week and next maybe and if I wouldn't have found a solution by then, I'd just change the frontend Any comment? |
an interesting point. what happens if the
I'm not sure I follow. Is it not as easy as Like even if we have to do out-of-band codegen, I think that it's worth having one API. If we don't, SWIM will surely come by in a few months, read the codebase, and think "wtf. why are there two different implementations of the same thing?!?!" much as I do when reading topi code :P I'd prefer for you to not struggle with this, so if it really becomes too onerous, just give me your acceptance criteria for the frontend "working" and I'll do my best to merge them. |
Well, I haven't thought about that. It seems a viable approach.
I take back my debugging concern. Previously, I sort of made
Thanks for the support 👍 Right now, I'm using runtime impl in I should say that inevitably the downside of |
The following are the current plans for TVM Rust including both "runtime" and "frontend" as part of roadmap v0.5.
common
crate for runtime and frontendPackedFunc
compatible with frontendcall_packed!
macro more general and compatible across both runtime and frontend sides as discussed.The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: