This is in support of a goal of changing the blanket `destroy` impl to
use (roughly):
```
private fn CanAggregateDestroy() -> type = "type.can_aggregate_destroy";
// Handles aggregate type destruction.
impl forall [AggregateDestroyT:! CanAggregateDestroy()] AggregateDestroyT as Destroy {
fn Op[addr self: Self*]() = "type.aggregate_destroy";
}
```
That isn't done here because there's still other issues that migrating
raises. What this *does* do is add the builtin functions, and in
particular, support to `FacetTypeInfo` to make `CanAggregateDestroy`
work.
The "special requirement" approach in `FacetTypeInfo` allows us to
support restricting a blanket impl under the current approach of impls.
Maybe we'll find a cleaner approach that can work in the future, but
this fits into the current model by propagating similar to other
requirements. I'm using an enum mask because we have a number of similar
things to add (e.g. copy, move) but I'm not sure we need a full vector.
A few alternatives considered were:
- Supporting syntax more like `where .Self impls
TypeCanAggregateDestroy(.Self, SupportedInterface,
UnsupportedInterface)`. I think it'd be a little cleaner, but requires
better compile-time evaluation in order to assess the type of the call.
Right now it's expected to be a `FacetType` too early to make this work,
and I was concerned about pouring too much more time down this route.
- Providing an actual interface, in particular doing name lookup back
into `Core.` for an interface. This would've added name lookup overhead,
and the question of whether an `impl` exists.
- Generating an interface. This avoids the name lookup, but would still
raise the question of whether an `impl` should also be generated. Work
I've previously done generating interfaces for class destruction also
feels complex to both write and understand (an unfortunate issue).
- Still modeling as an `ImplsConstraint`, for example by defining a
special `InterfaceId::CanAggregateDestroy = -2` similar to what we do on
other ids. I was hesitant because of how this expands the number of
modes of `InterfaceId`, and things for consuming code to watch out for,
for what feels like a relatively niche set of use-cases that are only
interface-like.
---------
Co-authored-by: Dana Jansens <danakj@orodu.net>
This uses each vector's size as a barrier between lists, to eliminate
the possibility of incidental collisions between entries of different
lists. This is the same as is done inside `AddBlock`.
I was thinking about this for destruction, which I may not be able to
use it for, but still think this may be a good change to keep features
consistent.
Change impls from `<interface>.impl` to `<self>.as.<interface>.impl`,
and *member* functions to `<parent scope>.<fn>` (non-member functions
exclude their parent scope). Stop special-casing builtin functions,
given the new naming scheme.
The purpose of this is to make it clearer when a member function is
being accessed and, if so, which member function. In particular, we
often access interface `Op` functions. The builtin function
special-casing was intended to help with that, but we still have lots of
`Op` functions. This particular approach should make the interactions
clearer.
This changes up queueing of block IDs a little because, in particular,
we need to process bodies of entities only after constants finish
processing. But, it should also result in less memory usage during
processing because it means we have less on the insts stack at any given
time, since we track a block rather than all instructions contained by
the block.
This drops file_test runtime from about 3s to 2.5s on my machine, which
is now ~30% faster than before #5653 slowed things down by adding a lot
of stuff to the production prelude.
---------
Co-authored-by: Jon Ross-Perkins <jperkins@google.com>
People seemed receptive [on
#toolchain](https://discord.com/channels/655572317891461132/655578254970716160/1379196447827689553),
so proceeding.
For the two name conflicts, I've set it up so that there's a
"foo.carbon" and "foo_with_prelude.carbon", to indicate that the
no-prelude approach is preferred (with a shorter name).
Note min_prelude will require a little more work/thought, I want to
avoid adding `--custom-core` etc.
Jon Ross-PerkinsandDana Jansens