This PR redefines `String.take` and variants to operate on
`String.Slice`. While previously functions returning a substring of the
input sometimes returned `String` and sometimes returned
`Substring.Raw`, they now uniformly return `String.Slice`.
This is a BREAKING change, because many functions now have a different
return type. So for example, if `s` is a string and `f` is a function
accepting a string, `f (s.drop 1)` will no longer compile because
`s.drop 1` is a `String.Slice`. To fix this, insert a call to `copy` to
restore the old behavior: `f (s.drop 1).copy`.
Of course, in many cases, there will be more efficient options. For
example, don't write `f <| s.drop 1 |>.copy |>.dropEnd 1 |>.copy`, write
`f <| s.drop 1 |>.dropEnd 1 |>.copy` instead. Also, instead of `(s.drop
1).copy = "Hello"`, write `s.drop 1 == "Hello".toSlice` instead.
This PR renames `Substring` to `Substring.Raw`.
This is to signify its status as a second-class citizen (not deprecated,
but no real plans for verification, like `String.Pos.Raw`) and to free
up the name `Substring` for a possible future type `String.Substring :
String -> Type` so that `s.Substring` is the type of substrings of `s`.
The functions `String.toSubstring` and `String.toSubstring'` will remain
for now for bootstrapping reasons.
This PR redefines `String` to be the type of byte arrays `b` for which
`b.IsValidUtf8`.
This moves the data model of strings much closer to the actual data
representation at runtime.
In the near future, we will
- provide variants of `String.Pos` and `Substring` that only allow for
valid positions
- redefine all `String` functions to be much closer to their C++
implementations
In the near-to-medium future we will then provide comprehensive
verification of `String` based on these refactors.
Now, `cmp` is just a fixed helper function.
In the future, we will be able to use (more efficient) specialized
versions during code generation by defining simp rules.
