Revert "[ARITH] Fix InternalError: Check failed: (eval_vec_) is false"

[tlopex]

Reverts #18536

[gemini-code-assist]

Summary of Changes

Hello @tlopex, I'm Gemini Code Assist¹! I'm currently reviewing this pull request and will post my feedback shortly. In the meantime, here's a summary to help you and other reviewers quickly get up to speed!

This pull request reverts a prior change (#18536) that aimed to resolve an InternalError within the arithmetic set evaluation logic. By reverting, the system restores the original behavior where an ICHECK assertion ensures that eval_vec_ is true when processing BroadcastNode expressions, effectively rolling back the attempt to handle a false eval_vec_ gracefully.

Highlights

• Revert of Previous Fix: This pull request is a direct revert of [ARITH] Fix InternalError: Check failed: (eval_vec_) is false #18536, which previously attempted to fix an InternalError related to the eval_vec_ flag.
• Restoration of ICHECK Assertion: The revert restores the ICHECK(eval_vec_); assertion within the VisitExpr_(const BroadcastNode* op) method in src/arith/int_set.cc. This undoes the previous change that replaced the assertion with a conditional check and a warning message.
• Removal of Graceful Handling: The conditional block that handled !eval_vec_ by logging a warning and returning IntervalSet::Everything() has been removed, reinstating the stricter assertion behavior.

Using Gemini Code Assist

The full guide for Gemini Code Assist can be found on our documentation page, here are some quick tips.

Invoking Gemini

You can request assistance from Gemini at any point by creating a comment using either /gemini <command> or @gemini-code-assist <command>. Below is a summary of the supported commands on the current page.

Feature	Command	Description
Code Review	/gemini review	Performs a code review for the current pull request in its current state.
Pull Request Summary	/gemini summary	Provides a summary of the current pull request in its current state.
Comment	@gemini-code-assist	Responds in comments when explicitly tagged, both in pull request comments and review comments.
Help	/gemini help	Displays a list of available commands.

Customization

To customize Gemini Code Assist for GitHub experience, repository maintainers can create a configuration file and/or provide a custom code review style guide (such as PEP-8 for Python) by creating and adding files to a .gemini/ folder in the base of the repository. Detailed instructions can be found here.

Limitations & Feedback

Gemini Code Assist may make mistakes. Please leave feedback on any instances where its feedback is incorrect or counter productive. You can react with 👍 and 👎 on @gemini-code-assist comments. If you're interested in giving your feedback about your experience with Gemini Code Assist for Github and other Google products, sign up here.

You can also get AI-powered code generation, chat, as well as code reviews directly in the IDE at no cost with the Gemini Code Assist IDE Extension.

Footnotes

1. Review the Privacy Notices, Generative AI Prohibited Use Policy, Terms of Service, and learn how to configure Gemini Code Assist in GitHub here. Gemini can make mistakes, so double check it and use code with caution. ↩

[gemini-code-assist]

Code Review

This pull request reverts a previous change, restoring a strict ICHECK for vector evaluation in VisitExpr_(const BroadcastNode* op). This improves consistency with other vector-related nodes. However, as noted in the specific comment, this revert carries the risk of re-introducing a bug that was fixed previously. It's important to ensure the underlying cause of that bug has been addressed to prevent regressions.

[gemini-code-assist]

This change reverts #18536, restoring the ICHECK(eval_vec_). While this makes the behavior consistent with VisitExpr_(const RampNode* op), it may re-introduce the InternalError that the original PR aimed to fix. If the underlying issue causing this method to be called with eval_vec_ == false has been addressed elsewhere, then this revert is correct. Otherwise, we might see the same crash again.

[tlopex]

cc @tqchen

[cchung100m]

Hi @tlopex

Thanks for reverting the PR and I'm sorry for any inconvenience caused.