tqchen opened a new issue #4648: [RFC] Unify IR Node and Reference Class Naming Convention URL: https://github.com/apache/incubator-tvm/issues/4648 In many node objects we introduced recently, we use the Node suffix to hold IR/AST nodes and no suffix for reference classes. ```c++ class RangeNode : public Object { public: Expr min; Expr extent; }; class Range : public ObjectRef { public: // constructor Range(Expr begin, Expr end); // static factory. static Range make_by_min_extent(Expr min, extent); }; ``` In the above example: - ```RangeNode``` is the container object. - ```Range``` is the reference class. - New objects are constructed via constructors in the reference class. - We also define clear factory function ```make_by_min_extent`` in the reference class. However, due to legacy reasons, we also have a few different styles in the codebase. In particular, some IR container object does have a ```Node``` suffix or a reference class. Because not every IR container object has a reference class, the references are constructed via static make functions in the object container class instead. The code block below shows an example: ``` class IntImm : public ExprNode { public: Expr make(DataType dtype, int64_t value); }; ``` ## Proposal This RFC proposes to adopt a single style throughout the codebase. We propose to adopt the following convention as a strawman: - Always use ```Node``` as the suffix for IR node container objects. - Always introduce a reference class(which does not have suffix) to each container object. - Because we have a reference class for each object class, we can use a constructor to directly construct a reference class - In some instances where we need a clearly named factory function, we can put them as a static function of the corresponding reference class. Notably, for object containers that are not part of IR, some end in Obj(e.g. ADTObj) and some end in Node(e.g. ModuleNode). This RFC will not seek to consolidate these names, but it would also be great to hear from everyone's thoughts about this topic as well. The main advantage of the proposed style is that the C++ code will be more consistent with the python version. It is also more natural to construct reference via constructors. Migrated from https://discuss.tvm.ai/t/unify-naming-convetion-for-ir-node-and-reference-classes
---------------------------------------------------------------- This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the URL above to go to the specific comment. For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: [email protected] With regards, Apache Git Services
