Fix scwq instruction and "phantom" error in purity checks

[ironcev]

Description

This PR fixes #6320 and #6431 by:

• properly treating the scwq instruction in purity check as a storage writing instruction.
• not emitting purity issues for __entry functions.

Additionally, the PR:

• removes purity checks from the type-checking phase. Those checks were:
  • redundant. The same checks were also done at the IR side.
  • incomplete. The checks were covering only the function and method calls, not other kinds of storage access (e.g., intrinsics).
  • inaccurate. The checks were relying on #[storage] attributes, which do not necessary represent actual storage access patterns.
• extends MetadataManager to be able to store more then one Span per MetadataIndex. E.g., for a function, we can now store the span of the whole function declaration, but in addition, also the span pointing only to the function name.
• removes two different and overlapping storage access mismatch errors and introduces one expressive diagnostics that points to the exact storage access violations inside of a function (see demo below).

Note that having the purity tests at the IR level means that no purity errors will be reported on non-used functions. This was already the case before, since the complete set of tests was done at the IR level, and only two tests (inaccurately) at the type-checking phase, where errors would be reported even for the non-used functions. The purity guaranty is given for all the compiled code.

Closes #6320.
Closes #6431.

Demo

Before, we had two different error messages, rendered potentially several times per access violation.

Now, we have only one error message that points to the access violations and explains them.

Checklist

• I have linked to any relevant issues.
• I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas.
• I have updated the documentation where relevant (API docs, the reference, and the Sway book).
  • If my change requires substantial documentation changes, I have requested support from the DevRel team
• I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works.
• I have added (or requested a maintainer to add) the necessary Breaking* or New Feature labels where relevant.
• I have done my best to ensure that my PR adheres to the Fuel Labs Code Review Standards.
• I have requested a review from the relevant team or maintainers.

[github-actions]

Benchmark for d22e678

Click to view benchmark

Test	Base	PR	%
code_action	5.3±0.08ms	5.3±0.11ms	0.00%
code_lens	300.1±6.84ns	302.1±8.02ns	+0.67%
compile	2.7±0.03s	2.7±0.04s	0.00%
completion	4.7±0.06ms	4.7±0.08ms	0.00%
did_change_with_caching	2.6±0.05s	2.6±0.06s	0.00%
document_symbol	844.9±18.44µs	923.6±46.60µs	+9.31%
format	72.3±0.82ms	67.2±0.78ms	-7.05%
goto_definition	339.2±8.33µs	346.5±4.21µs	+2.15%
highlight	9.1±0.04ms	9.1±0.05ms	0.00%
hover	488.5±7.64µs	502.5±5.14µs	+2.87%
idents_at_position	120.0±0.41µs	119.4±0.77µs	-0.50%
inlay_hints	639.8±39.15µs	643.5±10.03µs	+0.58%
on_enter	2.6±0.06µs	2.1±0.04µs	-19.23%
parent_decl_at_position	3.7±0.03ms	3.7±0.09ms	0.00%
prepare_rename	340.5±7.45µs	344.5±3.53µs	+1.17%
rename	9.7±0.20ms	9.4±0.13ms	-3.09%
semantic_tokens	1291.8±19.44µs	1282.6±15.20µs	-0.71%
token_at_position	348.5±13.28µs	336.1±2.83µs	-3.56%
tokens_at_position	3.7±0.06ms	3.7±0.02ms	0.00%
tokens_for_file	409.6±3.79µs	408.0±3.47µs	-0.39%
traverse	35.0±0.83ms	34.7±0.86ms	-0.86%

[github-actions]

Benchmark for 89bfeb5

Click to view benchmark

Test	Base	PR	%
code_action	5.3±0.15ms	5.3±0.01ms	0.00%
code_lens	295.9±5.06ns	299.2±13.54ns	+1.12%
compile	2.7±0.05s	2.7±0.06s	0.00%
completion	4.7±0.02ms	4.7±0.04ms	0.00%
did_change_with_caching	2.5±0.02s	2.5±0.03s	0.00%
document_symbol	878.3±28.01µs	907.3±30.65µs	+3.30%
format	70.6±0.51ms	69.6±0.71ms	-1.42%
goto_definition	332.1±8.41µs	345.7±6.17µs	+4.10%
highlight	9.1±0.11ms	9.2±0.13ms	+1.10%
hover	488.5±6.52µs	496.8±5.96µs	+1.70%
idents_at_position	119.9±0.42µs	119.7±1.35µs	-0.17%
inlay_hints	634.6±24.73µs	641.6±19.45µs	+1.10%
on_enter	2.4±0.09µs	2.0±0.08µs	-16.67%
parent_decl_at_position	3.7±0.03ms	3.7±0.03ms	0.00%
prepare_rename	332.9±6.30µs	340.3±3.75µs	+2.22%
rename	9.4±0.12ms	9.5±0.09ms	+1.06%
semantic_tokens	1146.5±26.89µs	1251.3±9.40µs	+9.14%
token_at_position	336.9±2.31µs	337.4±2.15µs	+0.15%
tokens_at_position	3.7±0.01ms	3.7±0.01ms	0.00%
tokens_for_file	397.5±1.94µs	396.9±2.11µs	-0.15%
traverse	32.8±0.67ms	33.0±0.51ms	+0.61%

[tritao]

Nice to see this, new approach looks a lot more robust.

[github-actions]

Benchmark for 7e4dbb2

Click to view benchmark

Test	Base	PR	%
code_action	5.3±0.06ms	5.2±0.05ms	-1.89%
code_lens	300.3±9.89ns	302.1±8.65ns	+0.60%
compile	2.7±0.05s	2.8±0.05s	+3.70%
completion	4.7±0.07ms	4.7±0.05ms	0.00%
did_change_with_caching	2.6±0.06s	2.7±0.04s	+3.85%
document_symbol	910.0±22.42µs	939.4±25.21µs	+3.23%
format	72.4±1.96ms	67.3±0.71ms	-7.04%
goto_definition	349.5±3.61µs	338.4±5.95µs	-3.18%
highlight	9.2±0.09ms	9.1±0.09ms	-1.09%
hover	502.0±33.72µs	487.4±7.24µs	-2.91%
idents_at_position	118.2±0.31µs	118.9±0.54µs	+0.59%
inlay_hints	672.2±25.87µs	639.6±20.30µs	-4.85%
on_enter	1985.0±107.62ns	1995.5±75.61ns	+0.53%
parent_decl_at_position	3.7±0.05ms	3.7±0.02ms	0.00%
prepare_rename	335.3±7.15µs	336.8±4.00µs	+0.45%
rename	9.4±0.07ms	9.4±0.10ms	0.00%
semantic_tokens	1221.8±13.64µs	1270.1±11.86µs	+3.95%
token_at_position	330.6±5.10µs	337.8±1.92µs	+2.18%
tokens_at_position	3.7±0.04ms	3.7±0.08ms	0.00%
tokens_for_file	400.5±6.34µs	406.6±4.45µs	+1.52%
traverse	35.0±0.56ms	34.5±0.54ms	-1.43%

[github-actions]

Benchmark for fef8e43

Click to view benchmark

Test	Base	PR	%
code_action	5.4±0.17ms	5.3±0.02ms	-1.85%
code_lens	298.5±4.75ns	299.6±7.23ns	+0.37%
compile	2.6±0.05s	2.7±0.08s	+3.85%
completion	4.7±0.06ms	4.8±0.04ms	+2.13%
did_change_with_caching	2.5±0.04s	2.6±0.03s	+4.00%
document_symbol	874.9±33.75µs	881.8±9.56µs	+0.79%
format	71.2±0.96ms	66.3±0.96ms	-6.88%
goto_definition	340.8±7.92µs	368.2±9.41µs	+8.04%
highlight	9.1±0.05ms	9.1±0.01ms	0.00%
hover	495.5±7.40µs	517.0±7.04µs	+4.34%
idents_at_position	119.5±0.27µs	119.0±0.32µs	-0.42%
inlay_hints	647.0±19.81µs	668.7±18.73µs	+3.35%
on_enter	2.1±0.03µs	1984.0±80.38ns	-5.52%
parent_decl_at_position	3.7±0.01ms	3.8±0.03ms	+2.70%
prepare_rename	339.0±7.68µs	342.3±3.14µs	+0.97%
rename	9.6±0.19ms	9.4±0.07ms	-2.08%
semantic_tokens	1239.3±17.62µs	1250.0±9.73µs	+0.86%
token_at_position	335.2±2.09µs	347.3±2.04µs	+3.61%
tokens_at_position	3.7±0.02ms	3.8±0.01ms	+2.70%
tokens_for_file	403.9±1.84µs	397.4±2.53µs	-1.61%
traverse	33.0±0.70ms	33.7±1.54ms	+2.12%