Note that I left some calls to `is_defined()` where I thought they were
interchangeable.
---------
Co-authored-by: Josh L <josh11b@users.noreply.github.com>
I'd considered moving DeclParams uses over, but when handling qualified
names, there's a parse node instead of an instruction. I did try to
unify a couple other uses though, including adding MergeDefinition. I
expect `interface` will use a little more once it's more completely
implemented, but maybe I'm wrong about that.
Note this isn't implementing checking through imports. The parse node
there is harder to access through the context, so would require
examining the entity in order to get the import declaration, to get at
the ImportIR. We also don't have a parse tree attached in that case, and
would need to add one to SemIR::File. But I believe we do want to add
that, so it's explicitly a TODO.
Note GetTokenText re-lexes literal values, so there's a bit of potential
overhead there. Not sure if we want a more efficient manner for
comparing in cases like this.
In `ClassType`s and `InterfaceType`s, track a `GenericInstanceId` for
the instance rather than just the argument list.
---------
Co-authored-by: Jon Ross-Perkins <jperkins@google.com>
This is mostly mechanically duplicating work done for generic classes to
also support generic interfaces.
Also fix both generic interfaces and generic classes to support
importing class and interface types with arguments from another file.
---------
Co-authored-by: Jon Ross-Perkins <jperkins@google.com>
Co-authored-by: Carbon Infra Bot <carbon-external-infra@google.com>
Check the parameters specified in a name qualifier against the
parameters of the entity that the qualifier refers to.
For interfaces, this required adding minimal support for parameterized
interface names.
---------
Co-authored-by: Jon Ross-Perkins <jperkins@google.com>
Following up on discussion from #3948, doing a general rename of
"enclosing scope" to "parent scope" (and "enclosing scopes" to "ancestor
scopes"). The intent is to improve understandability and collide less
with C++ terminology for "enclosing scope". Note this changes most uses
of "enclosing", but leaves behind a few like "enclosing function" and
"enclosing block".
Note this does create some "parent class" mentions for "adapt" and "var"
(the class they're within), which is maybe unfortunate, but we'd
probably say "base class" if we meant inheritance so perhaps that's
okay. Along the same lines, these are the only `parent_class` uses I see
now, and we do have a few `base_class`.
`Self` is modeled as a `bind_symbolic_name` with no corresponding value,
for now at least. In the future it might make sense to model it as a new
kind of instruction, or as a `bind_symbolic_name` whose value is a
`param`, but for now we just want it to introduce a symbolic constant.
In order to convert a value like the `Self` of an interface to a type, a
new instruction `facet_type_access` is introduced. This notionally
accesses the "type" field within a facet, converting it from a pair of
(type, witness) into just the type.
When declaring an associated entity in an interface -- just associated
functions for now -- create an associated entity value and corresponding
type to represent a "slot in a witness table". Also track the list of
associated entities on the interface so that we will eventually be able
to check impls against them.
Associated entities are represented as the integer index of their slot
in a witness table.
---------
Co-authored-by: Jon Ross-Perkins <jperkins@google.com>
I'm proposing a different split, along the line of "what does this
relate to". I view impl.h as having started down this route. Moving the
inst store stuff to inst.h feels odd to me given how much else is there
right now, but maybe it's still the best approach. Some files only
contain a store, no structured class, but I felt the consistency in file
naming (without _store suffixes) might help.
josh11bandJosh L
Jon Ross-Perkins
Richard SmithandJon Ross-Perkins
