`PotentialBindings` lost most of its responsibilities,
and are no longer comparable. Their main purpose now
is binding and metadata tracking (introduction/retraction).
New `BindingSet` type is something that represents a set
of bindings at the current step of the solver.
Instead of requiring result type of the member to conform to declaring protocol,
as originally proposed by SE-0299, let's instead require `Self` to be bound to
some concrete type in extension that declares a static member.
This would make sure that:
1. Members are only visible on a particular type;
2. There is no ambiguity regarding what base of the member chain is going to be.
The first type represents a result of an unresolved member chain,
and the second type is its base type. This constraint acts almost
like `Equal` but also enforces following semantics:
- It's possible to infer a base from a result type by looking through
this constraint, but it's only solved when both types are bound.
- If base is a protocol metatype, this constraint becomes a conformance
check instead of an equality.
Rename `openUnboundGenericTypes` to `convertInferableTypes`. In addition to unbound generics, this method also converts placeholder types to fresh type variables.
Create a new namespace - `swift::constraints::inference` and associate
`PotentialBinding` with it. This way it would be possible for constraint
graph to operate on `PotentialBinding(s)` in the future.
Currently potential bindings are stored in a vector (`SmallVector`)
and every call has to pass additional set of unique types to
inference methods to unqiue the bindings. Instead let's merge
these two together and use `SetVector` for binding storage,
which would also be great for incremental mode that can't
pass additional sets around.
for arithmetic operators.
Only sort overloads that are related, e.g. Sequence
overloads. Further, choose which generic overloads
to attempt first based on whether any known argument types
conform to one of the standard arithmetic protocols.
disjunction choice that does not introduce conversions, check to see
if known argument types satisfy generic operator conformance requirements
early, and skip the overload choice if any requirements fail.
This helps the solver avoid exploring way too much search space when
the right solution involves a generic operator, but the argument types
are known up front, such as `collection + collection + collection`.
Doing so streamlines access to the information associated with literal
protocol requirements and allows to add more helpers.
Also cache default type in the struct itself for easy access.
One more step towards incrementality of binding inference. Instead of
trying to determine literal protocol coverage during finalization
of the bindings, let's do that as soon as new bindings and/or literal
protocol requirements are discovered.
Literal protocol requirements are handled differently from other
protocols, they require additional contextual information (such
as coverage, direct/transitive distinction), and participate in
binding inference (could be turned into default bindings).
Let's keep defaults separate from direct and transitive bindings,
that would make it easier to handle them in incremental model.
Instead of generating bindings for defaults and adding to the main
set, let's allow producer to choose what to do with them once type
variable has been picked for attempting.
As a step towards making binding inference more incremental, let's
make producer responsible for adding hole type binding instead of
doing so in `finalize`.
Wrapping bindings into optional type based on presence of
an `ExpressibleByNilLiteral` conformance requirement should
be done after type variable has been selected for attempting.
Otherwise such upfront work would be wasteful since it doesn't
affect binding ranking in any way.
