Use the `%target-swift-5.1-abi-triple` substitution to compile the tests for
deployment to the minimum OS versions required for use of opaque types, instead
of disabling availability checking.
This PR refactors the ASTDumper to make it more structured, less mistake-prone, and more amenable to future changes. For example:
```cpp
// Before:
void visitUnresolvedDotExpr(UnresolvedDotExpr *E) {
printCommon(E, "unresolved_dot_expr")
<< " field '" << E->getName() << "'";
PrintWithColorRAII(OS, ExprModifierColor)
<< " function_ref=" << getFunctionRefKindStr(E->getFunctionRefKind());
if (E->getBase()) {
OS << '\n';
printRec(E->getBase());
}
PrintWithColorRAII(OS, ParenthesisColor) << ')';
}
// After:
void visitUnresolvedDotExpr(UnresolvedDotExpr *E, StringRef label) {
printCommon(E, "unresolved_dot_expr", label);
printFieldQuoted(E->getName(), "field");
printField(E->getFunctionRefKind(), "function_ref", ExprModifierColor);
if (E->getBase()) {
printRec(E->getBase());
}
printFoot();
}
```
* Values are printed through calls to base class methods, rather than direct access to the underlying `raw_ostream`.
* These methods tend to reduce the chances of bugs like missing/extra spaces or newlines, too much/too little indentation, etc.
* More values are quoted, and unprintable/non-ASCII characters in quoted values are escaped before printing.
* Infrastructure to label child nodes now exists.
* Some weird breaks from the normal "style", like `PatternBindingDecl`'s original and processed initializers, have been brought into line.
* Some types that previously used ad-hoc dumping functions, like conformances and substitution maps, are now structured similarly to the dumper classes.
* I've fixed the odd dumping bug along the way. For example, distributed actors were only marked `actor`, not `distributed actor`.
This PR doesn't change the overall style of AST dumps; they're still pseudo-S-expressions. But the logic that implements this style is now isolated into a relatively small base class, making it feasible to introduce e.g. JSON dumping in the future.
* Use fancy arrows (`→`) because they are distinct from and shorter than `->`,
and fancier.
* We have two ways of demarcating locators: `@ <locator>` and `[[<locator>]];`.
Stick to the first, which is shorter and clearer.
* 'attempting type variable' → 'attempting binding'. *Bindings* are attempted,
not type variables.
* `considering ->` → `considering:`. I think a colon is semantically more fit
and makes things easier to read if the considered constraint has arrows in its
description or types. It’s also shorter this way.
