A sink collects what a pass found so the pass can go on to the next thing.
It is switched on by the caller, not by the code that raises, which is what
leaves the interactive path untouched: the daemon checks one form, asks for
a sink that is off, and still gets one exception.
Two resync points, and both are places the work already had a boundary. In
the parser it is a top-level form — the reader found where each declaration
ends, so skipping a bad one cannot lose its place, while inside a
declaration there is no such landmark and one bad defn stays one error. In
the checker it is the two passes: pass one, which builds every name and
signature, still stops at the first refusal, because a signature it could
not make sense of leaves a hole that pass two would report once per mention.
Thirty unknown-name lines under one wrong signature are not thirty errors.
Pass two is where the volume is and where collecting pays, and by then every
signature is sound, so a body that fails cannot make the next body fail.
That is what makes a declaration a resync point needing no resynchronising.
The first line of an entry is still exactly file:line:col: message, because
that is the GNU format compilation-mode already parses and the whole of the
editor story. Everything under it is indented, which compilation-mode
ignores, so the underline is free. A note gets an entry of its own rather
than being folded into the error's block — that is what makes the second
place somewhere next-error can go, and is the reason notes carry locations.
Every part of it degrades to the bare first line: a location the checker
invented has line 0, the prelude and the REPL have names that are not paths,
and a file can change under us between being read and being blamed. An error
printer that can raise is worse than one that prints less.
Loc.Error now carries a diagnostic: a stable kind, a span, notes that each
have their own span and severity, and the macro expansion it came from. The
notes are the part that was actually missing — "this is wrong here" plus
"because of that, over there" is two places and two explanations, and a
single string can state only one of them.
The compatibility story for the daemon, which was the open question: the
single-diagnostic exception stays the single-diagnostic exception. Session
and dev evaluate one form and have one failure to report, so they take a
location and a message out of it with Loc.summary and are otherwise
unchanged. A second exception carries a list, and only a driver that
compiles a whole file raises it, so nothing interactive has to know it is
there.
No message text changed.
Loc.t grows an exclusive end, defaulting to the start, so a location nobody
widened is a zero-width span at a point and every existing call site keeps
its old meaning. Only the reader knows where a form ends, so only the reader
fills them in — one helper in the one place that holds both ends, which is
why nothing above Reader had to learn a span exists.
The width assertion is the point of the tests: the field could exist, nothing
could fill it, and every underline would be one character long while the
feature looked finished.
