In line with the proposal in #4682, this changes the array syntax to be
array(T, N). `array` is a builtin keyword which must be followed by
parens containing two expressions and a separating comma.
The array type expression is still fully builtin, it does not forward to
a Core.Array library type yet. It merely adds the `ArrayType`
instruction, as was done with the previous syntax.
Followup work will change the instruction to reference to Core.Array,
once the library type exists and can be used directly.
---------
Co-authored-by: zygoloid <richard@metafoo.co.uk>
Treat template bindings as introducing template phase, and propagate it
in the same way we propagate the checked generic phase.
Rename "symbolic" to "checked symbolic" to make room for "template
symbolic". Also rename "phase" to "dependence".
Change parse tree from `template (T:! type)` to `(template T):! type`,
so that we have information about whether a binding is a template
binding available when forming the representation of the binding
pattern. This incidentally fixes a bug that we would accept `template
addr A:! B` instead of the intended `addr template A:! B`.
Track whether a symbolic binding is a template binding on the
`EntityName` object. I'm borrowing a bit from the `CompileTimeBindIndex`
for this in order to avoid making `EntityName`s larger. Longer-term, we
should think about using a different representation for symbolic
bindings, to avoid including these fields in all `EntityName`s, but
that's out of scope for this change.
So far, template bindings are treated as having the same phase as
checked bindings, but that will change in a future PR.
For an expression such as `(Type as Interface).AssocFn()`, track the
`Self` type `Type` in the result of the member access so that it's
available when checking the function call.
This introduces a new kind of type, `ImplFunctionType`, that represents
the type of a function that is expected within an impl, modeled as the
type of the function within the interface plus a value to use as `Self`.
Calls to values of this type behave like calls to the underlying
function except that the `Self` parameter is pre-bound to the self type
from the facet.
In order to support this, fix an issue where the imported list of
generic bindings lost their association with their enclosing generic.
This adds a little complexity to `import_ref`, including a new recursive
cycle that I intend to address in a follow-up PR.
---------
Co-authored-by: Jon Ross-Perkins <jperkins@google.com>
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.
Changes the name of SemIR `import_ref`s to use the format
`<package>.<entity>`.
<table>
<tr><th>Before</th><th>After</th></tr>
<tr>
<td><code>%import_ref.05a: type</code></td>
<td><code>%Main.D: type</code></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td><code>%import_ref.8f2: <witness></code></td>
<td><code>%Main.import_ref.8f2: <witness></code></td>
</tr>
</table>
* [Discord discussion in
#toolchain](https://discord.com/channels/655572317891461132/655578254970716160/1330253540999827577)
* Closes#4769
This removes some churn when adding new diagnostic cases to test files
(where previous to this change the newly added newline would cause the
previous diagnostic CHECKs to be updated including changes to the line
number because the CHECK for the blank line meant an extra line between
CHECK and source line).
A few alternatives discussed here:
https://discord.com/channels/655572317891461132/655578254970716160/1329573358475673723
---------
Co-authored-by: Jon Ross-Perkins <jperkins@google.com>
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.
Dana Jansensandzygoloid
Calvin
Geoff RomerandRichard Smith
David BlaikieandJon Ross-Perkins