Should CallIndirect be in core hugr spec?

[cqc-alec]

It's introduced in the spec as part of the "Higher-order (Tierkreis) Resource", rather than "Functional description", but is implemented as a core OpType. Where does it belong?

I think we were not intending to include higher-order functions in the core part of the spec; do we make an exception for "eval"?

[acl-cqc]

I think "eval" and CallIndirect are the same thing and that thing belongs in the higher-order/tierkreis resource

[cqc-alec]

Shall we convert this to an issue to remove OpType::CallIndirect? It isn't used anywhere yet as far as I can see.

[acl-cqc]

We should have that issue...but should we also include most of the LeafOps? I thought we had an issue to make most of those into extension ops, but I don't see it - should we include those too? (@ss2165)

[ss2165]

yes I think leafop should mostly be operations for core spec types, the exact breakdown of which needs more thought first