Their example contains dynamic shapes, so my assumption was that it's a valid use case. The issue might potentially come from more than one dynamic dimension, but I'm not entirely sure how to track that down.

Small clarity fixes

Fix typos in documentation

Small additional cleanup

Add small clarity fixes

Small clarity updates

Fix typo

Moved header util file and created a .cpp file. Added a couple of fixes

Add more llvm-style formatting, changed return type of checkForDynamicBatchOnly function

Add checks for unranked tensors

Remove LogicalNotOp

Revert accidentally deleted line

Rename variable to adhere to style guidelines

Fixed test names, removed unneeded declarations

Oh, I completely missed that SItoFOp also checks for it to be signless, not signed. This makes sense. Thank you!

I might be misunderstanding the situation, but if the Ops are signless why does SIToFOp exist? If we handle the explicitly signed case, why not the explicitly unsigned one?

This was created by mistake as a result of me messing some commands up while familiarizing myself with the review process. Not sure where the code came from, but it's not mine so please ignore this revision :)

Fixed typo in title

Fixed lint issues

Changed to use operation->getResultTypes()