Thanks for the reply.
I think proving two expressions by `Analyzer` directly is another reasonable solution, but there may be a higher time overhead compared with the "rewrite" method. Currently, the `StructuralEqual` mechanism has limit ability (only remap-var case) to distinguish these expressions. Overall, this is an idea worth trying and I will try to write a new mechanism similar to the `StructuralEqual` to solve this problem. For your second question, actually the `RewriteSimplifier` is part of the `Analyzer`. But it is true that adding the new rule directly into `tir.Simplify` may be a better way and I will try it. Thanks again for your excellent suggestions! --- [Visit Topic](https://discuss.tvm.apache.org/t/dynamic-shape-better-simplify-support-for-dynamic-boundary-check/10812/4) to respond. You are receiving this because you enabled mailing list mode. To unsubscribe from these emails, [click here](https://discuss.tvm.apache.org/email/unsubscribe/5aeda18ede6d3f0b30648ed22ff0eff1f1ffc04fc0100d163c677a5f118063d0).
