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.
And use the new project_existential_box to get to the address value.
SILGen now generates a project_existential_box for each alloc_existential_box.
And IRGen re-uses the address value from the alloc_existential_box if the operand of project_existential_box is an alloc_existential_box.
This lets the generated code be the same as before.
Having a separate address and container value returned from alloc_stack is not really needed in SIL.
Even if they differ we have both addresses available during IRGen, because a dealloc_stack is always dominated by the corresponding alloc_stack in the same function.
Although this commit quite large, most changes are trivial. The largest non-trivial change is in IRGenSIL.
This commit is a NFC regarding the generated code. Even the generated SIL is the same (except removed #0, #1 and @local_storage).
Debug variable info may be attached to debug_value, debug_value_addr,
alloc_box, and alloc_stack instructions.
In order to write textual SIL -> SIL testcases that exercise the handling
of debug information by SIL passes, we need to make a couple of additions
to the textual SIL language. In memory, the debug information attached to
SIL instructions references information from the AST. If we want to create
debug info from parsing a textual .sil file, these bits need to be made
explicit.
Performance Notes: This is memory neutral for compilations from Swift
source code, because the variable name is still stored in the AST. For
compilations from textual source the variable name is stored in tail-
allocated memory following the SIL instruction that introduces the
variable.
<rdar://problem/22707128>
(libraries now)
It has been generally agreed that we need to do this reorg, and now
seems like the perfect time. Some major pass reorganization is in the
works.
This does not have to be the final word on the matter. The consensus
among those working on the code is that it's much better than what we
had and a better starting point for future bike shedding.
Note that the previous organization was designed to allow separate
analysis and optimization libraries. It turns out this is an
artificial distinction and not an important goal.
