Ownership is truly a property not of a declaration, but of a function body. So
it makes sense to just match what we deserialize.
This also helps us to avoid mismatches if we lower ownership from a function,
delete it, and then relink it.
I also used this as an opportunity to clean up where we set that flag in
deserialization to only happen in one place for both declarations/definitions.
Dynamic replacements are currently written in extensions as
extension ExtendedType {
@_dynamicReplacement(for: replacedFun())
func replacement() { }
}
The runtime implementation allows an implementation in the future where
dynamic replacements are gather in a scope and can be dynamically
enabled and disabled.
For example:
dynamic_extension_scope CollectionOfReplacements {
extension ExtentedType {
func replacedFun() {}
}
extension ExtentedType2 {
func replacedFun() {}
}
}
CollectionOfReplacements.enable()
CollectionOfReplacements.disable()
This allowed me to fold all of the weird direct calls to createFunction into a
singular createFunctionForForwardReference. This is the only API that is needed
by the SILParser so only providing that gives us a significantly cleaner API.
rdar://42301529
This commit does not modify those APIs or their usage. It just:
1. Moves the APIs onto SILFunctionBuilder and makes SILFunctionBuilder a friend
of SILModule.
2. Hides the APIs on SILModule so all users need to use SILFunctionBuilder to
create/destroy functions.
I am doing this in order to allow for adding/removing function notifications to
be enforced via the type system in the SILOptimizer. In the process of finishing
off CallerAnalysis for FSO, I discovered that we were not doing this everywhere
we need to. After considering various other options such as:
1. Verifying after all passes that the notifications were sent correctly and
asserting. Turned out to be expensive.
2. Putting a callback in SILModule. This would add an unnecessary virtual call.
I realized that by using a builder we can:
1. Enforce that users of SILFunctionBuilder can only construct composed function
builders by making the composed function builder's friends of
SILFunctionBuilder (notice I did not use the word subclass, I am talking
about a pure composition).
2. Refactor a huge amount of code in SILOpt/SILGen that involve function
creation onto a SILGenFunctionBuilder/SILOptFunctionBuilder struct. Many of
the SILFunction creation code in question are straight up copies of each
other with small variations. A builder would be a great way to simplify that
code.
3. Reduce the size of SILModule.cpp by 25% from ~30k -> ~23k making the whole
file easier to read.
NOTE: In this commit, I do not hide the constructor of SILFunctionBuilder since
I have not created the derived builder structs yet. Once I have created those in
a subsequent commit, I will hide that constructor.
rdar://42301529
