✨ Initial implementation of the mqtdyn Dialect

[DRovara]

Description

This pull request migrates the incomplete implementation of the mqtdyn Dialect from the internal repository and finishes the implementation.

The initial implementation was done by @ystade.

It also contains one initial transformation pass, constant-folding, to set up the transformation infrastructure.

---

At the same time, it also defines CommonTraits.td/CommonTraits.h, a collection of Traits that are applicable even outside the bounds of a single dialect. These traits replace verification methods of indiidual operations to reduce duplicate code.

There is still sole degree of code duplication. This will be further explored in a later PR.

Checklist:

• The pull request only contains commits that are related to it.
• I have added appropriate tests and documentation.
• I have made sure that all CI jobs on GitHub pass.
• The pull request introduces no new warnings and follows the project's style guidelines.

[burgholzer]

Before merging, we should consider the following question: There is quite a lot of shared code (e.g., consider MQTDynTraits.h and MQTOptTraits.h). Are we okay with that or do we want to reuse some code? In case we want more reuse, we probably need to implement some data structures that are shared over the different dialects; the examples above both use their respective dialect's UnitaryInterface implementation. Alternatively, maybe C++ templates also do the trick.

I haven't really looked through the code in detail, but in general I would argue that we are currently at a point where we should really try to find the cleanest possible design for what we plan to do. Right now, the code base is still small enough and has no dependents so that we can (more or less) easily make big breaking changes. With every PR that grows the MLIR part, this becomes harder and harder.
That being said, I would very much like to avoid redundancy wherever possible.
If we already need to duplicate quite some code while the code base is small, this is not really a good indication for the general design at the moment. So let's strive for making this as clean as possible.

If I am not mistaken, traits and interfaces are not necessarily bound to a particular dialect, are they? So we could be sharing (elements of) them across dialects?
Any other particular suggestions for keeping it simple here?

[codecov]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

📢 Thoughts on this report? Let us know!

[burgholzer]

Hey @DRovara 👋🏻
Thanks for all your work on this. This is looking great.
All the feedback is truly minor and should be easy to address.
Looking forward to merging this once everything is addressed 🙂
And to try to reduce the duplication a little more across these files.

[burgholzer]

This looks great. Just one more minor nit.

[burgholzer]

Great 👍🏻 thanks for also adding the Changelog entry 🙂