This was already done for getSuccessorBlocks() to distinguish getting successor
blocks from getting the full list of SILSuccessors via getSuccessors(). This
commit just makes all of the successor/predecessor code follow that naming
convention.
Some examples:
getSingleSuccessor() => getSingleSuccessorBlock().
isSuccessor() => isSuccessorBlock().
getPreds() => getPredecessorBlocks().
Really, IMO, we should consider renaming SILSuccessor to a more verbose name so
that it is clear that it is more of an internal detail of SILBasicBlock's
implementation rather than something that one should consider as apart of one's
mental model of the IR when one really wants to be thinking about predecessor
and successor blocks. But that is not what this commit is trying to change, it
is just trying to eliminate a bit of technical debt by making the naming
conventions here consistent.
Before this commit all code relating to handling arguments in SILBasicBlock had
somewhere in the name BB. This is redundant given that the class's name is
already SILBasicBlock. This commit drops those names.
Some examples:
getBBArg() => getArgument()
BBArgList => ArgumentList
bbarg_begin() => args_begin()
This eliminates all inline creation of SILBasicBlock via placement new.
There are a few reasons to do this:
1. A SILBasicBlock is always created with a parent function. This commit
formalizes this into the SILBasicBlock API by only allowing for SILFunctions to
create SILBasicBlocks. This is implemented via the type system by making all
SILBasicBlock constructors private. Since SILFunction is a friend of
SILBasicBlock, SILFunction can still create a SILBasicBlock without issue.
2. Since all SILBasicBlocks will be created in only a few functions, it becomes
very easy to determine using instruments the amount of memory being allocated
for SILBasicBlocks by simply inverting the call tree in Allocations.
With LTO+PGO, normal inlining can occur if profitable so there shouldn't be
overhead that we care about in shipping compilers.
As there are no instructions left which produce multiple result values, this is a NFC regarding the generated SIL and generated code.
Although this commit is large, most changes are straightforward adoptions to the changes in the ValueBase and SILValue classes.
This enables array value propagation in array literal loops like:
for e in [2,3,4] {
r += e
}
Allowing us to completely get rid of the array.
rdar://19958821
SR-203
