Infer static type from the value itself for imported arrays/dictionaries

[SupunS]

Work towards #870

Description

Infer the static type from the array/dictionary value, if the expected type is not specific enough/ not available.

Depends on #1025 and #1048

---

• Targeted PR against master branch
• Linked to Github issue with discussion and accepted design OR link to spec that describes this work
• Code follows the standards mentioned here
• Updated relevant documentation
• Re-reviewed Files changed in the Github PR explorer
• Added appropriate labels

[SupunS]

The last two commits 1d26160 and bbba319 have the actual code changes. The rest is from the dependent PRs.

[codecov-commenter]

Codecov Report

Merging #1049 (a21446f) into master (a523a95) will increase coverage by 0.00%.
The diff coverage is 66.66%.

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##           master    #1049   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   77.59%   77.60%           
=======================================
  Files         274      274           
  Lines       35241    35243    +2     
=======================================
+ Hits        27347    27350    +3     
+ Misses       6809     6808    -1     
  Partials     1085     1085           

Flag	Coverage Δ
unittests	77.60% <66.66%> (+<0.01%)	⬆️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
runtime/convertValues.go	77.26% <66.66%> (+0.40%)	⬆️
runtime/interpreter/primitivestatictype.go	72.42% <0.00%> (-0.94%)	⬇️
runtime/interpreter/value.go	82.49% <0.00%> (+0.02%)	⬆️

---

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update a523a95...a21446f. Read the comment docs.

[turbolent]

@SupunS Do you think that we could hold off with this for now and get all the supertype inference PRs in later, i.e. the next release / spork? Do you think it's possible to do something simple for now, like e.g. infer [AnyStruct] for an array value where the expected static type is AnyStruct? (same for dictionaries)

[SupunS]

@turbolent Yeah, that should be fine. I added this more as a way to test the concept/usage.
I think arrays are rather simple. We can assume it to be [AnyStruct]
Same can be done for dictionary values.

But for dictionary keys, AnyStruct might be a problem because it is not a valid type for keys. And might become a problem somewhere down the line?

[github-actions]

Cadence Benchstat comparison

This branch with compared with the base branch onflow:master commit a523a95
The command go test ./... -run=XXX -bench=. -shuffle=on -count N was used.
Bench tests were run a total of 7 times on each branch.

Results

	old.txt	new.txt
	time/op		delta
RuntimeResourceDictionaryValues-2	16.0ms ± 3%	16.9ms ± 4%	+5.71%	(p=0.001 n=6+7)
RuntimeStorageWriteCached-2	166µs ±54%	179µs ±24%	~	(p=0.318 n=7+7)
ParseDeploy/decode_hex-2	1.50ms ± 2%	1.50ms ± 6%	~	(p=0.383 n=7+7)
ParseArray-2	23.0ms ± 0%	23.0ms ± 2%	~	(p=0.731 n=6+7)
ParseInfix-2	24.3µs ± 2%	24.1µs ± 2%	~	(p=0.535 n=7+7)
ParseFungibleToken-2	472µs ± 4%	465µs ± 2%	~	(p=0.318 n=7+7)
QualifiedIdentifierCreation/One_level-2	3.30ns ± 1%	3.34ns ± 4%	~	(p=0.456 n=7+7)
QualifiedIdentifierCreation/Three_levels-2	169ns ± 1%	169ns ± 3%	~	(p=0.693 n=7+7)
CheckContractInterfaceFungibleTokenConformance-2	170µs ± 0%	171µs ± 1%	~	(p=0.535 n=7+7)
InterpretRecursionFib-2	2.82ms ± 9%	2.77ms ± 1%	~	(p=0.445 n=7+6)
NewInterpreter/new_interpreter-2	1.21µs ± 6%	1.22µs ± 3%	~	(p=0.805 n=7+7)
NewInterpreter/new_sub-interpreter-2	2.27µs ± 3%	2.31µs ± 3%	~	(p=0.104 n=7+7)
ContractInterfaceFungibleToken-2	48.6µs ± 1%	47.7µs ± 1%	−1.69%	(p=0.009 n=6+6)
ParseDeploy/byte_array-2	34.8ms ± 3%	34.1ms ± 1%	−1.94%	(p=0.007 n=7+7)
RuntimeFungibleTokenTransfer-2	1.29ms ± 5%	1.23ms ± 3%	−4.88%	(p=0.017 n=7+7)
	alloc/op		delta
RuntimeStorageWriteCached-2	83.7kB ± 0%	83.7kB ± 0%	~	(p=0.878 n=7+7)
RuntimeResourceDictionaryValues-2	4.34MB ± 0%	4.34MB ± 0%	~	(p=0.620 n=7+7)
RuntimeFungibleTokenTransfer-2	233kB ± 0%	233kB ± 0%	~	(p=0.383 n=7+7)
QualifiedIdentifierCreation/One_level-2	0.00B	0.00B	~	(all equal)
QualifiedIdentifierCreation/Three_levels-2	64.0B ± 0%	64.0B ± 0%	~	(all equal)
ContractInterfaceFungibleToken-2	26.7kB ± 0%	26.7kB ± 0%	~	(all equal)
CheckContractInterfaceFungibleTokenConformance-2	66.4kB ± 0%	66.4kB ± 0%	~	(all equal)
InterpretRecursionFib-2	1.21MB ± 0%	1.21MB ± 0%	~	(p=0.678 n=7+6)
NewInterpreter/new_interpreter-2	680B ± 0%	680B ± 0%	~	(all equal)
NewInterpreter/new_sub-interpreter-2	1.06kB ± 0%	1.06kB ± 0%	~	(all equal)
	allocs/op		delta
RuntimeStorageWriteCached-2	1.42k ± 0%	1.42k ± 0%	~	(all equal)
RuntimeResourceDictionaryValues-2	108k ± 0%	108k ± 0%	~	(p=0.551 n=7+7)
RuntimeFungibleTokenTransfer-2	4.42k ± 0%	4.43k ± 0%	~	(p=0.098 n=6+7)
QualifiedIdentifierCreation/One_level-2	0.00	0.00	~	(all equal)
QualifiedIdentifierCreation/Three_levels-2	2.00 ± 0%	2.00 ± 0%	~	(all equal)
ContractInterfaceFungibleToken-2	458 ± 0%	458 ± 0%	~	(all equal)
CheckContractInterfaceFungibleTokenConformance-2	1.07k ± 0%	1.07k ± 0%	~	(all equal)
InterpretRecursionFib-2	25.0k ± 0%	25.0k ± 0%	~	(all equal)
NewInterpreter/new_interpreter-2	11.0 ± 0%	11.0 ± 0%	~	(all equal)
NewInterpreter/new_sub-interpreter-2	31.0 ± 0%	31.0 ± 0%	~	(all equal)

[turbolent]

Nice!