Refactor types/ops

[Paul Sandoz]

> On Oct 15, 2024, at 10:26 AM, Maurizio Cimadamore <maurizio.cimadamore at oracle.com> wrote:
> 
> I agree with this direction.
> 
> Furthermore, I wonder if, even for stuff that we can implement using the "core" dialect (e.g. a method declaration can be implemented using a func op), we should introduce its equivalent Java-like abstraction. E.g. MethodOp (which trivially lowers into a FuncOp).
> 
> E.g. I think it's important we minimize the amount of going up/down the ladder that users have to do. If I want to work on Java, ideally the `java` package should have everything I need (and the resulting model will the *lower* into something more `core`). Am I being too extreme?
> 

Perhaps :-) At some point I don’t think it helps, we just end up duplicating behavior, possibly making it harder to compose, and we might as well have just one dialect. Maybe we end up there? The dialect concept seems really useful though if we lean into enabling definition of dialects and mixing them, as we and others have done, and I think it is worth experimenting/encouraging further exploration before we decide.

Paul.