Thanks @manupa-arm , building on what you said.
- I do not think there is a strong contention on C1, the main point is that the target can be recursive. So a target like the follows is totally OK. ```bash - kind: hetro-exec - runtime : crt - executor: vm - devices: [ se_scope0, se_scope1 ] ``` So the argument is not about where/or how these field should be structured in a recursive data structure. Something that looks like a CompilationOption is OK from my pov. But the suggestion is that we make that one kind of (recursive) target, as from UX's pov it can be seen that way. - I want to add C3: The ability to leverage tagging in target and improve the overall user experience is a very important factor. I am going to discuss C2 on a separate post since that worths more examples. --- [Visit Topic](https://discuss.tvm.apache.org/t/pre-rfc-compilation-configuration-representation/11372/12) 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/84633aded8b0425112ceeadeb2830f9fdcea2ccca31e5294b066aaf806ea4358).
