[Bug] Inconsistent definition of the inputs parameter of operators

[soodoshll]

Currently, operators have different constructor signatures according to different numbers of input tensors. For example:

• UnaryOp(Tensor)
• BinaryOp(Tensor, Tensor)
• ReduceOp(List[Tensor])

Which causes a problem in

hidet/python/hidet/graph/operator.py

Line 130 in 80a35d6

return cls(*inputs, **attributes).run()

No matter which signature the constructor uses, the input tensors will be flattened and stored in inputs attribute of an Operator (with a type of List[Tensor]). When we need to reuse the saved inputs, it's hard to deal with different signatures separately. Maybe it's better to use a unified signature, like Op(List[Tensor])?

[yaoyaoding]

We require each operator has the following constructor signature:

class AwnsomeOperator:
    def __init__(a: Tensor, b: Tensor, ..., d: Tensor, param1, param2, ..., paramk):
        ...

And the inputs are [a, b, ..., d].

I have fix the inconsistency for minimum/maximum operator and now all operator should satisfy the above design.