Add KeySet.union operation #123
Open
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Introduces a new `KeySet.union` operation which combines two KeySets with the same schema into a single KeySet containing all keys contained in either KeySet. For the purposes of op-tree rewriting, this operation is relatively opaque; most other operations can't be pulled through it safely, so the only way unions are rewritten is to reorder operands and restructure nested unions. In principle filters and subtraction could be pushed down through it, but it seems unlikely to me that anyone will care if we can detect that `ks1.union(ks2).filter(cond)` is equivalent to `ks1.filter(cond).union(ks2.filter(cond))`. `tmlt.analytics.keyset._keyset` was also rewritten to use the pipe syntax for unions instead of `typing.Union`, as the name conflict was confusing.
tmager
commented
Feb 8, 2026
| + textwrap.indent(str(self.right), " ") | ||
| ) | ||
|
|
||
| def decompose( |
Contributor
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Open question for another MR: do we need this decomposition logic anymore? I don't think anything that used it was open-sourced.
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
That matches my recollection; I think we can probably get rid of it.
Maegereg
reviewed
Feb 10, 2026
| + textwrap.indent(str(self.right), " ") | ||
| ) | ||
|
|
||
| def decompose( |
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
That matches my recollection; I think we can probably get rid of it.
Comment on lines
+427
to
+429
| # TODO(tumult-labs/tumult#3384): Mention the behavior of this method in | ||
| # terms of its interation with KeySetPlans in the docstring and to | ||
| # the below error message. |
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
What does this mean exactly?
Contributor
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Ah, this was a copy from the other methods on the class -- we should recreate the relevant issue and point this at it, but it's a reminder to update the documentation/exception text for these methods when KeySet.detect becomes usable.
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Introduces a new
KeySet.unionoperation which combines two KeySets with matching schemas into a single KeySet containing all keys contained in either KeySet.For the purposes of op-tree rewriting, this operation is relatively opaque; most other operations can't be pulled through it safely, so the only way unions are rewritten is to reorder operands and restructure nested unions. In principle filters and subtraction could be pushed down through it, but it seems unlikely to me that anyone will care if we can detect that
ks1.union(ks2).filter(cond)is equivalent toks1.filter(cond).union(ks2.filter(cond)).tmlt.analytics.keyset._keysetwas also rewritten to use the pipe syntax for unions instead oftyping.Union, as the name conflict was confusing.#122