Z3 with a separate solver constructor rather than as a function to be called on the solver.

I believe most solvers would treat set-logic in such as way. I'm curios if it makes sense to add optional logic attribute to smt.solver op 🤔

I'm curios if it makes sense to add optional logic attribute to smt.solver op 🤔

We thought the same, but decided that we should probably use SMTLIB as the golden reference - agreed that most solvers probably only support it as a one-off, but it would be a shame not to support functionality that some solvers could have

Should we add an integration test for Z3 set-logic?

Not sure what you mean, there's an integration test for the Z3 export added in integration_test/Dialect/SMT/basic.mlir?

Not sure what you mean, there's an integration test for the Z3 export added in integration_test/Dialect/SMT/basic.mlir?

Oh sorry, I overlooked that one.

Thanks!