Add a `NameId` that is effectively just a wrapper around a `StringId`,
with
some additional predefined values for names that don't correspond to
strings, such as the name of `self` or the function's return slot.
When declaring a name such as `fn Ns.Class.F() { ... }`, enter the
scopes of `Ns` and `Ns.Class` as we form the name, and remain in those
non-lexical scopes until the end of the declaration.
When performing an unqualified lookup, look in any enclosing non-lexical
scopes in addition to looking into the lexical name table.
We now track a scope index with each lookup result in the lexical name
lookup table. This is used to determine whether a lexical or non-lexcial
result is the innermost result and whether a declared name is in the
same scope as some previous introduction of that name or in a nested
scope. For now, this could just be the index into the scope_stack, but
the intent is to also use this to detect names being declared after they
are first looked up, which requires the indexes to outlive their scopes,
so we use a persistent numbering of all scopes instead. The persistent
numbering also permits more invariant checking.
Following up on discussion yesterday regarding this split.
Note, I'm expecting #3341 to do IdentifierId -> NameId in SemIR. It
might be worth adding NameId creation directly to StringStore if you're
content with this setup though.
Track the fields in a class, and generate a corresponding struct type as
the object representation for the class. For now, we always use a
pointer as the value representation for a class.
1. In general, `semantics_ir` -> `sem_ir`, to match the directory name.
2. For the list of `ValueStore`-related accessors on `SemIR::File`, add
them to `check`'s `Context` object, shortening access.
Finishing what #3316 started, add more bespoke ValueStore-like
structures to File. With this, the things which previously had somewhat
boilerplate Add/Get functions are now all on side classes, giving a
uniform style of API for calling.
Note, I was on the fence about making things public on ValueStore. If
it's preferred that I make some things there protected I certainly can,
there's just a trade-off that may mean more distinct child/wrapper
types.
Retain the `ClassDeclaration` node to represent a syntactic declaration
of a class (including possibly a declaration of a generic class), but
use a separate SemIR node to represent the class type itself. This
allows us to give the two separate treatment.
The `ClassDeclaration` is still entered into the name lookup table for
its enclosing scope, but when it is named in an expression, the class
type is produced instead. When the class declaration is named in a
declaration name, it can be used to define members of the class, but an
expression that resolves to the class type cannot be used to define
members of the class.
In order to distinguish these cases, use `Name` rather than
`NameExpression` for the left-hand side of a `QualifiedName` parse node.
This removes the only use of the `Expression` form of a declaration
name, so that is also removed.
In the future, `ClassType` will also be used to describe types such as
`Vector(T)`, for which there is no corresponding `ClassDeclaration`.
Building on #3313, start using ValueStore on File. Functions and classes
are straightforward. Types here I present as a borderline case where
maybe we want a more bespoke API, but maybe this is okay? Most other
things probably need a slightly different API, which although I might do
that for a consistent interface, felt more out-of-scope for this change.
This updates lexing to use the data. I'll do checking separately, just
to split changes.
Note the ValueStore structure is also set up such that SemIR::File can
use it for other fields.
---------
Co-authored-by: Richard Smith <richard@metafoo.co.uk>
This includes being able to define a class that was previously
forward-declared, and being able to define a member function out-of-line
that was previously declared inside a class.
No support for fields or methods yet, and a class definition doesn't yet
cause the class to be treated as a complete type.
---------
Co-authored-by: Jon Ross-Perkins <jperkins@google.com>
This is shorter, more closely connected to code using the typed node
types, and avoids using the ambiguous word `Node` in places referring to
typed `SemIR` nodes.
Replace `SemIR::Node::GetAsFoo` and `SemIR::Node::Foo::Make` with
`SemIR::Foo` class that represents a particular kind of node, with named
fields.
Rename `SemIR::IntegerLiteral` and `SemIR::RealLiteral` to
`IntegerValue` / `RealValue` to better reflect their purpose and avoid a
name collision with the corresponding `SemIR` node kinds.
Remove `NodeKind::Invalid` and the `SemIR::Node` default constructor
entirely, as they were not used for anything.
Continuing along with #3070. Note this is just a file rename, with BUILD
edits; every file previously in semantics/ should show as moved (except
maybe BUILDs, which split).
josh11b
Richard Smith
Jon Ross-Perkins
