Following the reference syntax of types in MLIR it would seem that complex type definitions such as
memref<?x memref<?xf32>> are possible.
Experience shows that such type definitions are rejected by
mlir-opt. Is there a rationale on why? Is this maybe a current limitation of the TF dialect, or is it a permanent limit? And what is the exact limit - is it forbidden to have a
ShapedType as base type in a
The same stands for tensor types.
My question is not completely intellectual - allowing such constructs would allow a simpler expression of recurrent algorithms that take variable-sized sequences of inputs. And thus possibly avoid in many cases the manipulation of opaque references of type