Add a full entity representation for associated constants, and build a
`Generic` object for them. This `Generic` is parameterized by the
enclosing `Self` type, allowing the use of `Self` within the type of the
associated constant to be supported.
When performing impl lookup for an associated constant, produce the type
with the provided self type substituted for its `Self` along with any
generic parameters of the interface.
Split the handling of associated constant declarations into two parts,
corresponding to the code before the `=`, and the code between the `=`
and `;` (if any). The former goes into the generic declaration region;
the latter into the generic definition region. This prepares us to
handle the default value for an associated constant, but for now we're
just storing the information and not actually using it.
Remove the entity type field from `assoc_entity_type`, because it's
almost unused and is an attractive nuisance -- it must necessarily be a
type in the generic scope of the associated constant rather than in the
scope of the instruction (because there is no `Self` anywhere else),
which means that it's hard to substitute into or derive meaning from.
See `toolchain/check/testdata/impl/assoc_const_self.carbon` for tests of
the new functionality; these used to cause the toolchain to crash.
This is a followup from #4834, I searched for "invalid" uses in our
codebase. This is mostly changing comments, and a couple debug
functions, but shouldn't affect testable behavior.
Note a couple things I'll highlight as not changing (but could) are:
- `ReturnTypeInfo::is_valid`
- `"invalid"` uses in the formatter
- `AddInvalid` for `!has_value` in `inst_fingerprinter` (because the
cases it's called sound invalid-ish)
High level, replacing `Id::Invalid` with `Id::None` and `Id::is_valid`
with `Id::has_value` for clarity, as discussed
[here](https://discord.com/channels/655572317891461132/655578254970716160/1331664574545395794).
The `IntId` refactoring is needed together with `AnyIdBase` because it's
also used with `ValueStore`.
Note, trying to be careful not to rewrite `EnumBase::InvalidIndex`, or
`is_valid` in general (e.g., `IdKind::is_valid`).
I've tried to sequence commits here:
1. Automatic replacements:
- `((?:Id|Index)(?: |::|\(|Base(?:\(|::)))Invalid((?:Index)?\W)` ->
`$1None$2`
- `<invalid>` -> `<none>`
- `InvalidNodeId` -> `NoneNodeId`
- `/\*invalid\*/` -> `/*none*/`
- `id((?:_|\(\))(?:\.|->))is_valid` -> `id$1has_value`
2. Manual edits:
- In `int.h` and `int_test.cpp`
- `IntT` has `is_value`, which I'm renaming to `is_embedded_value`.
- Manual edits to comments in this file.
- `AnyIdBase` and `IdBase`
- Declaration of `is_valid` -> `has_value`, `InvalidIndex` ->
`NoneIndex`.
- In `ids.h` and `ids.cpp`
- `is_valid` -> `has_value`
- `// An explicitly invalid ID.` -> `// An ID with no value.`; similar
for index
- Various math on `InvalidIndex` -> `NoneIndex`
- Various mentions of "valid" in comments
- In `value_store.h`, for `IdT::Invalid`, plus one comment
- In `impl.h` and `tokenized_buffer.h`, we had different initialization
of `::None` values (versus `ids.h` syntax) that I fixed manually.
- Spot checks to compile
- Particularly where `is_valid` replacements didn't catch spots due to
different naming.
3. Autoupdate tests
4. verbose.carbon (NOAUTOUPDATE)
5. Comment spot checks
Note there are probably other mentions of "Invalid" that should be swept
up, but I'd like to argue for merging and separating out remaining
cleanup since this is so sweeping (and likely to hit merge conflicts
from churn). We'll probably have lingering mentions of "invalid" for a
bit regardless, just because there are uses of "invalid" in non-Id APIs.
Include the index rather than the name in the fingerprint of a symbolic
binding. While both the index and the name contribute to the canonical
identity, using either one of them in the fingerprint is sufficient to
ensure that distinct entities get different fingerprints. Changing the
name of a symbolic binding should ideally not result in fingerprint
changes, so exclude the name from the fingerprint when we have an index.
Use the canonical type and constraint when fingerprinting an impl, so
that uses of names in `name_ref` instructions aren't considered, only
the entity the name resolves to, and different ways of spelling the same
type have the same fingerprint. This similarly allows compatible changes
to be made to impls without changing the fingerprint.
Exclude the declaration block when determining the fingerprint of a
declaration. The declaration block contains the declarations of
parameters of the declaration, which do affect whether two declarations
are identical, but not whether they denote the same entity, because it
would be invalid to have different declaration blocks for declarations
with the same name in the same scope. Therefore changes to the
declaration block are compatible, and it's useful for such changes to
not affect the fingerprint.
This is not easy to test in isolation with our current testing
machinery. However, a follow-on PR will change the name of a parameter
in the prelude, and with this in place, will not cause any changes to
occur elsewhere in the toolchain tests.
This makes InstFingerprinter::GetOrCompute for InstId and InstBlockId
more similar, in that they just construct a Worklist and call Run.
The Worklist::Run method differentiates if the next todo item is an
InstBlockId and in that case it adds everything in the block to its
todo list and continues processing.
We only use the fingerprint of an InstBlockId if its at the bottom of
the todo stack, which is the case when it's placed there initially by
InstFingerprinter::GetOrCompute. We could cache it but we currently
do not. If we did, we could also cache other InstBlockIds found
inside instructions, but at the moment we skip through them and
add their instructions rather than adding the InstBlockId to the
todo stack.
Instead of including the raw index of the specific, which is unstable
across files and across unrelated changes, use a fingerprint of the
constant values of the specific arguments. This is a placeholder until
we decide on how we want to mangle specific functions.
Use it in the instruction namer to make instruction names more stable
across unrelated changes to the toolchain or the prelude.
---------
Co-authored-by: Dana Jansens <danakj@orodu.net>
Richard Smith
Jon Ross-Perkins
Dana Jansens