For #6830, add support for inline C++ fragments as a declaration rather
than as a packaging directive. For now, this uses `inline Cpp
<string-literal>;` as syntax. The prior `import Cpp inline
<string-literal>;` is left alone for the time being. We can decide
separately whether to remove that.
`inline Cpp` requires that there was at least one `import Cpp`. It's not
clear to me if that's the right design long-term, but it seems
reasonable for now.
Assisted-by: Gemini via Google Antigravity
This turns `Cpp` into a keyword, and makes it map to `NameId::Cpp` and
`PackageNameId::Cpp`.
Per discussion with zygoloid, the keyword versus identifier question is
deliberately kept open by #4846. This PR switches to a keyword because
mapping to a specific `PackageNameId` works best with a special `NameId`
not backed by an `IdentifierId`. We could in theory make it work using
`IdentifierId` or a runtime-tracked `PackageNameId` for `Cpp` (e.g.
stored on `SemIR::File`), but this approach is consistent with `Core`
and so seemed like a good starting point.
---------
Co-authored-by: Dana Jansens <danakj@orodu.net>
This adds support for importing C++ code directly from source rather
than via a `#include`.
---------
Co-authored-by: Jon Ross-Perkins <jperkins@google.com>
Richard Smith
Jon Ross-PerkinsandDana Jansens