Reimplement destroy as an interface (#5678)

This changes `Destroy` to use an interface for its implementation.

Note that this change includes a lot of test updates. Even when
`Destroy` is a no-op, it still causes code generation as part of
determining that.

Originally I was trying to use ranges to cut down the scope of this, and
to a degree I think they have. But a flipside here is that cases where
no destructors should be generated -- particularly globals -- would be
needed to completely remove destructor calls. Even for ranges, the range
can often include the destructor placement. So I've shifted
frame-of-thought a little: accept a bunch of destructor churn, because
destructors are needed and will be prevalent. The verbosity is a feature
of the design to make desugaring apparent in IR, not a bug.
This commit is contained in:
Jon Ross-Perkins
2025-06-27 21:57:14 +00:00
committed by GitHub
parent bba037738d
commit 0722dab0ef
171 changed files with 11900 additions and 1434 deletions
@@ -50,6 +50,8 @@ fn M() {
// CHECK:STDOUT: %.loc35 = load i32, ptr %n.var, align 4, !dbg !11
// CHECK:STDOUT: %G.call = call i32 @_CG.Main.b88d1103f417c6d4(i32 %.loc35), !dbg !12
// CHECK:STDOUT: store i32 %G.call, ptr %m.var, align 4, !dbg !13
// CHECK:STDOUT: %.loc32_3 = load i32, ptr %m.var, align 4, !dbg !8
// CHECK:STDOUT: %.loc31_3.2 = load i32, ptr %n.var, align 4, !dbg !7
// CHECK:STDOUT: ret void, !dbg !14
// CHECK:STDOUT: }
// CHECK:STDOUT: