feat: add inlay hints for function call args

[shruti2522]

1. Does this PR affect any open issues?(Y/N) and add issue references (e.g. "fix #123", "re #123".):

• N
• Y
  re [LFX] [Track] LSP inlayhint and hover content content optimization #1244

2. What is the scope of this PR (e.g. component or file name):

3. Provide a description of the PR(e.g. more details, effects, motivations or doc link):

• Affects user behaviors
• Contains syntax changes
• Contains variable changes
• Contains experimental features
• Performance regression: Consumes more CPU
• Performance regression: Consumes more Memory
• Other

4. Are there any breaking changes?(Y/N) and describe the breaking changes(e.g. more details, motivations or doc link):

• N
• Y

no inlay hint for builtin functions and system module functions args:

5. Are there test cases for these changes?(Y/N) select and add more details, references or doc links:

• Unit test
• Integration test
• Benchmark (add benchmark stats below)
• Manual test (add detailed scripts or steps below)
• Other

[Peefy]

CI failed. cc @shruti2522

[Peefy]

@He1pa Could you help review it?

[Peefy]

You can rebase the main branch and fix the CI errors.

[He1pa]

for z = func([x: ]a, [y: ]y = 1, [z: ]z = 2) , [y: ] and [z: ] are not needed. I perfer z = func([x: ]a, y = 1, z = 2)

[shruti2522]

for z = func([x: ]a, [y: ]y = 1, [z: ]z = 2) , [y: ] and [z: ] are not needed. I perfer z = func([x: ]a, y = 1, z = 2)

Yes. I have removed inlay hints for kwargs.

[coveralls]

Pull Request Test Coverage Report for Build 9804032628

Details

• 43 of 44 (97.73%) changed or added relevant lines in 1 file are covered.
• No unchanged relevant lines lost coverage.
• Overall coverage increased (+0.02%) to 71.65%

---

Changes Missing Coverage	Covered Lines	Changed/Added Lines	%
kclvm/sema/src/advanced_resolver/node.rs	43	44	97.73%

Totals
Change from base Build 9803208081:	0.02%
Covered Lines:	56612
Relevant Lines:	79012

---

💛 - Coveralls

[coveralls]

Pull Request Test Coverage Report for Build 9804032628

Details

• 46 of 47 (97.87%) changed or added relevant lines in 1 file are covered.
• 1 unchanged line in 1 file lost coverage.
• Overall coverage increased (+0.03%) to 71.654%

---

Changes Missing Coverage	Covered Lines	Changed/Added Lines	%
kclvm/sema/src/advanced_resolver/node.rs	46	47	97.87%

Files with Coverage Reduction	New Missed Lines	%
kclvm/sema/src/advanced_resolver/node.rs	1	87.66%

Totals
Change from base Build 9803208081:	0.03%
Covered Lines:	56615
Relevant Lines:	79012

---

💛 - Coveralls

[shruti2522]

fixed CI @Peefy

[coveralls]

Pull Request Test Coverage Report for Build 9804685946

Details

• 45 of 46 (97.83%) changed or added relevant lines in 1 file are covered.
• No unchanged relevant lines lost coverage.
• Overall coverage increased (+0.03%) to 71.654%

---

Changes Missing Coverage	Covered Lines	Changed/Added Lines	%
kclvm/sema/src/advanced_resolver/node.rs	45	46	97.83%

Totals
Change from base Build 9803208081:	0.03%
Covered Lines:	56616
Relevant Lines:	79013

---

💛 - Coveralls

[coveralls]

Pull Request Test Coverage Report for Build 9820424669

Details

• 103 of 105 (98.1%) changed or added relevant lines in 2 files are covered.
• No unchanged relevant lines lost coverage.
• Overall coverage increased (+0.05%) to 71.675%

---

Changes Missing Coverage	Covered Lines	Changed/Added Lines	%
kclvm/sema/src/advanced_resolver/node.rs	87	89	97.75%

Totals
Change from base Build 9803208081:	0.05%
Covered Lines:	56676
Relevant Lines:	79074

---

💛 - Coveralls

[Peefy]

I think there is a small problem here that when a function parameter is input with a literal constant, there is actually no parameter symbol here, right? Can you provide more ideas or suggestions? cc @He1pa

[He1pa]

I think there is a small problem here that when a function parameter is input with a literal constant, there is actually no parameter symbol here, right? Can you provide more ideas or suggestions? cc @He1pa

There should be an Expression Symbol

[shruti2522]

I have changed the logic to get the value symbol for args, but the inlay hints aren't working. Please review @Peefy @He1pa

[He1pa]

Why can not use do_arguments_symbol_resolve_with_hint here?

[shruti2522]

I guess the snapshots suggest some position error is arising here, maybe the node key doesn't render the correct position of the arg.

-old snapshot
+new results
────────────┬──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
  220   220 │             data: None,
  221   221 │         },
  222   222 │         InlayHint {
  223   223 │             position: Position {
        224 │+                line: 19,
        225 │+                character: 4,
        226 │+            },
        227 │+            label: LabelParts(
        228 │+                [
        229 │+                    InlayHintLabelPart {
        230 │+                        value: "y: ",
        231 │+                        tooltip: None,
        232 │+                        location: None,
        233 │+                        command: None,
        234 │+                    },
        235 │+                ],
        236 │+            ),
        237 │+            kind: None,
        238 │+            text_edits: None,
        239 │+            tooltip: None,
        240 │+            padding_left: None,
        241 │+            padding_right: None,
        242 │+            data: None,
        243 │+        },
        244 │+        InlayHint {
        245 │+            position: Position {
  224   246 │                 line: 21,
  225   247 │                 character: 3,
  226   248 │             },
  227   249 │             label: LabelParts(
┈┈┈┈┈┈┈┈┈┈┈┈┼┈┈┈┈┈┈┈┈┈┈┈┈┈┈┈┈┈┈┈┈┈┈┈┈┈┈┈┈┈┈┈┈┈┈┈┈┈┈┈┈┈┈┈┈┈┈┈┈┈┈┈┈┈┈┈┈┈┈┈┈┈┈┈┈┈┈┈┈┈┈┈┈┈┈┈┈┈┈┈┈┈┈┈┈┈┈┈┈┈┈┈┈┈┈┈┈┈┈
  284   306 │             padding_left: None,
  285   307 │             padding_right: None,
  286   308 │             data: None,
  287   309 │         },
  288       │-        InlayHint {
  289       │-            position: Position {
  290       │-                line: 27,
  291       │-                character: 9,
  292       │-            },
  293       │-            label: LabelParts(
  294       │-                [
  295       │-                    InlayHintLabelPart {
  296       │-                        value: "x: ",
  297       │-                        tooltip: None,
  298       │-                        location: None,
  299       │-                        command: None,
  300       │-                    },
  301       │-                ],
  302       │-            ),
  303       │-            kind: None,
  304       │-            text_edits: None,
  305       │-            tooltip: None,
  306       │-            padding_left: None,
  307       │-            padding_right: None,
  308       │-            data: None,
  309       │-        },
  310       │-        InlayHint {
  311       │-            position: Position {
  312       │-                line: 27,
  313       │-                character: 12,
  314       │-            },
  315       │-            label: LabelParts(
  316       │-                [
  317       │-                    InlayHintLabelPart {
  318       │-                        value: "y: ",
  319       │-                        tooltip: None,
  320       │-                        location: None,
  321       │-                        command: None,
  322       │-                    },
  323       │-                ],
  324       │-            ),
  325       │-            kind: None,
  326       │-            text_edits: None,
  327       │-            tooltip: None,
  328       │-            padding_left: None,
  329       │-            padding_right: None,
  330       │-            data: None,
  331       │-        },
  332   310 │     ],
  333   311 │ )

Need some suggestions here to figure out the issue because the logic seems fine @Peefy @He1pa

[He1pa]

node

Two problems here:

1. node_symbol_map.get() not always get value symbol. there are some other kind of symbols. but you get symbol from values by index. so insert hint y: to line 19.(this index is in expression but you get from value)
2. for value symbol, this will get the definition symbol instead of ref symbol(for a, actually it will get symbol in line 1 instead of line 29). so the inlay hint will insert to line 1

The second question is a bit complicated for now, we can skip it.

    pub fn do_arguments_symbol_resolve_with_hint(
        &mut self,
        args: &'ctx [ast::NodeRef<ast::Expr>],
        kwargs: &'ctx [ast::NodeRef<ast::Keyword>],
        with_hint: bool,
        params: Vec<Parameter>,
    ) -> anyhow::Result<()> {
        for (arg, param) in args.iter().zip(params.iter()) {
            self.expr(arg)?;
            let symbol_data = self.gs.get_symbols_mut();

            if let Some(arg_ref) = symbol_data
                .symbols_info
                .node_symbol_map
                .get(&self.ctx.get_node_key(&arg.id))
            {
                match arg_ref.kind {
                    // crate::core::symbol::SymbolKind::Value => {
                    //     if let Some(value) = symbol_data.values.get_mut(arg_ref.get_id()) {
                    //         if with_hint {
                    //             value.hint = Some(SymbolHint::VarHint(param.name.clone()));
                    //         }
                    //     }
                    // }
                    crate::core::symbol::SymbolKind::Expression => {
                        if let Some(expr) = symbol_data.exprs.get_mut(arg_ref.get_id()) {
                            if with_hint {
                                expr.hint = Some(SymbolHint::VarHint(param.name.clone()));
                            }
                        }
                    }
                    _ => {}
                }
            }
        }

You also need to modify the definition of hint in SymbolKind::Expression
inlay hint will be z[: any] = func(a, [y: ]1, z = 2) if it work

[Peefy]

LGTM