Currently each interface has a `Self` facet internally that becomes a
binding to every entity inside the interface: associated constants,
functions, and require decls. Each of these has to be independently
generic as a result. This makes is challenging in extended name lookup
to move into an extended scope of an interface, as we have a specific
for the interface, but the names within require a different specific
that includes a `Self` facet value.
We generalize this relationship by adding a second generic to Interface,
called `generic_with_self`. When we want to work with entities inside
the interface, we move from the interface-without-specific to the
interface-with-self specific by adding a Self to the specific. This is
done independently of any particular entity inside the Interface, as
those entities are now all members of the interface-with-self generic.
Associated constants no longer need a generic of their own, as they do
not have separate generic bindings. Functions retain a generic, but if
the function has no generic arguments, it will have no bindings of its
own now.
Require decls retain a generic so that their specific can be
instantiated separately from the interface. Requiring the interface to
be complete does not require the types in a require decl to be complete
unless it is modified by `extend`. So we allow them to be completed
later by keeping them in a separate generic.
Named constraints look like interfaces and gain the additional inner
generic-with-self, with the same relationship to require decls.
This removes the need for name lookup to perform Substitution of a Self
facet into the extended scope instruction. Instead, the
`SpecificConstant` instruction inserted by a `require` decl is part of
the interface-with-self generic. When looking through a FacetType for
extended scopes, for each interface, we push the scope with the specific
for the interface-with-self. Then the constant value of the
`SpecificConstant` is correctly modified by the provided self
automatically through applying that specific.
I'm taking the approach of making DiagnosticBase an API so that we can
pass similar diagnostics as parameters. An alternative would be to do
the function_ref approach we've done elsewhere, but these felt more
boilerplate to me.
Note I'm also modifying messages here. Let me know if you'd like
different changes and/or just keeping current formatting (keeping
current formatting would also allow removing some of the templating I've
added, but it felt helpful putting explicit tokens where possible). But
also, things like "`protected` not allowed on `interface` declaration at
file scope" were part of the phrasing issue, I think.
---------
Co-authored-by: Richard Smith <richard@metafoo.co.uk>
Support for types (particularly classes) is left as a TODO.
There's also an issue I'm observing with a "define in impl" test, but
this is probably an issue with resolving the prior declaration which is
imported indirectly. The PR was already feeling big, so I'm choosing to
cut here.
Note, this does not implement the rule "The owning library's API file
must import the `extern` declaration, and must also contain a
declaration."
With private modifiers, we'll want to start checking modifiers later,
e.g. after a name conflict is detected (and potentially merged). I think
we've agreed to be more explicit about whether the modifier functions
are manipulating state, versus trying to keep the state on the stack a
little longer (moving Pop to the end of these functions).
Removing FileScope from the stack and renaming it to DeclIntroducerStack
to better reflect the usage and behavior. The FileScope mostly reflects
an approach that wasn't ultimately adopted.
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`.
Right now, each sequential modifier verification tends to re-fetch the
enclosing scope, doing equivalent verification. Change code to more
explicitly do the fetch once, sharing the result, also making the
enclosing scope available to the caller for other work.
Note, the type store similarly carries an inst store pointer; that's
what I'm basing having the name scope store's inst store pointer on.
I think the new name is more consistent for how `enclosing_scope_id` is
used relative to `name_id` (even removing the clarifying note on
`enclosing_scope_id_for_new_inst`). Suggesting `initial_scope_index` as
a replacing for the old `enclosing_scope`, hoping it's a little clearer.
I'm replacing `target_scope_id` uses in modifier logic because they
seemed to be based on the NameContext use.
This doesn't actually track whether a declaration is `extern`. It does,
however:
- Factor out and expand merge support for classes, sharing handling with
functions.
- This makes the ClassRedefinition diagnostic redundant, as the
redeclaration checking overlaps.
- Add partial `extern` handling to class handling; just some
verifications of correct use.
- Factor out `extern` on member handling for sharing with `fn`.
- Fixes a bug in import_ref where a class's definition_id wasn't
assigned when defining.
This changes how a redefinition is handled (replaced, rather than
merged). I don't know whether that's ideal, but I think it results in
easy-to-understand consequences, and it's more consistent with how `fn`
works.
There's enough work here that this felt like a decent cut point,
particularly as the amount of work to actually add `extern` tracking
will be significant.
The purpose of this change is to allow something such as a FunctionDecl
instruction to note an imported instruction as the "loc_id". Note that
doesn't occur here: this change is already very sweeping in edits. There
is no testdata affected, intended to show equivalent behavior.
We might want to consolidate NodeId references towards LocationId, but
if that's preferred, I'd still like to split it out. A lot of this just
piping through LocationId where it's a build error otherwise, enough
that imports should be able to start using it for diagnostics.
ValueStores are added but still unused -- just flushing out structure
for review.
Restructuring SemIRLocation is necessary to use LocationId this way. For
TokenOnly, it's not getting used in Parse, so I migrated it to Check and
it's now specific to SemIRLocation.
I also considered making LocationId reference an InstId (which would
need to be an ImportRef) instead of an ImportIRInstId. However, that
would've required import.cpp to add instructions for decls which are
reached during resolution -- we typically don't have an inst ready for
use. An extra inst is essentially 16 bytes in InstId's ValueStore + 4
bytes in LocationId's ValueStore, whereas this is 8 bytes per.
Still needs more merge/redeclaration logic for import semantics, but
this felt like a reasonable point to send a PR.
---------
Co-authored-by: Chandler Carruth <chandlerc@gmail.com>
This doesn't add full support. I'm separating it out to make the effects
of the modifier changes clearer for review. I'm restructuring a little
with the expectation that we'll have some more categories of modifier
keywords in the future (similar to `extern`, these may not be in a "set"
such as access), and thus easily scaling up to a few more would be
useful.
Previously, we created scopes for implicit parameter lists and tuple
patterns, but that meant that bindings went out of scope too soon. We
now keep them in scope until the end of the enclosing declaration. This
is accomplished by pushing a scope for parameters when we handle a name
that might have them, and then popping the scope again if it turns out
that there were no parameters.
For a case such as:
```carbon
fn A(T:! type).B(U:! type).F(x: T, y: U) {
var z: T;
}
```
... we now have the following scopes in the stack:
- A parameter scope containing `T`.
- A class scope for `A(T:! type)`.
- A parameter scope containing `U`.
- A class scope for `A(T:! type).B(U:! type)`.
- A parameter scope containing `x: T` and `y: U`.
- A function body scope containing `z: T`.
The innermost scope when check processes a declaration of a function,
class, or similar is now often a parameter scope rather than the
enclosing scope in which the class or function is declared, so the
target scope is now passed explicitly into the modifier checking code
that wants to inspect that enclosing scope.
Dana Jansens
Jon Ross-PerkinsandRichard Smith
David Blaikie
josh11bandJon Ross-Perkins