Rename module terminology to program

[JoshuaBatty]

Description

Currently we have the ability to cache programs and also clear these programs from the engines using a garbage collector. The current terminology refers to modules rather than programs. I want to implement more granular caching and GC at the module level rather than just at the program level. This helps clear up what is actually being cached and cleared from the GC.

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 7d312a8

Click to view benchmark

Test	Base	PR	%
code_action	5.4±0.13ms	5.3±0.06ms	-1.85%
code_lens	335.9±4.55ns	287.6±8.10ns	-14.38%
compile	3.1±0.05s	3.1±0.04s	0.00%
completion	4.6±0.11ms	4.5±0.11ms	-2.17%
did_change_with_caching	2.9±0.03s	2.9±0.07s	0.00%
document_symbol	1043.4±61.80µs	1031.0±30.75µs	-1.19%
format	74.6±1.53ms	73.0±1.25ms	-2.14%
goto_definition	361.3±7.88µs	363.3±5.67µs	+0.55%
highlight	8.8±0.22ms	8.8±0.54ms	0.00%
hover	484.9±10.05µs	490.1±9.33µs	+1.07%
idents_at_position	124.0±1.47µs	122.7±0.94µs	-1.05%
inlay_hints	645.0±35.59µs	652.2±18.43µs	+1.12%
on_enter	459.2±6.01ns	455.3±18.08ns	-0.85%
parent_decl_at_position	3.6±0.07ms	3.6±0.06ms	0.00%
prepare_rename	359.3±6.18µs	362.4±6.70µs	+0.86%
rename	9.5±0.22ms	9.3±0.19ms	-2.11%
semantic_tokens	987.1±18.77µs	970.5±26.29µs	-1.68%
token_at_position	355.4±4.52µs	355.1±6.15µs	-0.08%
tokens_at_position	3.6±0.03ms	3.6±0.16ms	0.00%
tokens_for_file	422.8±3.62µs	420.1±1.56µs	-0.64%
traverse	42.6±0.86ms	41.6±1.61ms	-2.35%

[github-actions]

Benchmark for e133ea9

Click to view benchmark

Test	Base	PR	%
code_action	5.3±0.07ms	5.2±0.09ms	-1.89%
code_lens	335.2±11.13ns	288.1±9.17ns	-14.05%
compile	3.0±0.03s	3.0±0.05s	0.00%
completion	4.7±0.12ms	4.6±0.09ms	-2.13%
did_change_with_caching	2.9±0.04s	2.9±0.04s	0.00%
document_symbol	990.8±28.78µs	953.8±35.22µs	-3.73%
format	74.0±1.31ms	74.3±1.04ms	+0.41%
goto_definition	414.0±4.94µs	360.0±5.55µs	-13.04%
highlight	8.8±0.11ms	8.8±0.18ms	0.00%
hover	530.8±6.09µs	486.9±7.77µs	-8.27%
idents_at_position	123.8±0.24µs	123.1±1.11µs	-0.57%
inlay_hints	689.7±22.18µs	650.1±20.07µs	-5.74%
on_enter	461.4±13.18ns	461.2±13.30ns	-0.04%
parent_decl_at_position	3.6±0.02ms	3.6±0.04ms	0.00%
prepare_rename	405.9±11.49µs	360.0±3.73µs	-11.31%
rename	9.3±0.12ms	9.3±0.16ms	0.00%
semantic_tokens	973.0±20.29µs	967.3±23.68µs	-0.59%
token_at_position	401.2±2.51µs	355.9±5.71µs	-11.29%
tokens_at_position	3.6±0.03ms	3.6±0.03ms	0.00%
tokens_for_file	419.8±1.94µs	416.9±1.92µs	-0.69%
traverse	41.6±1.58ms	40.9±0.90ms	-1.68%

[github-actions]

Benchmark for 8644c33

Click to view benchmark

Test	Base	PR	%
code_action	5.3±0.10ms	5.6±0.28ms	+5.66%
code_lens	336.1±9.16ns	287.9±8.00ns	-14.34%
compile	3.1±0.08s	3.1±0.03s	0.00%
completion	4.6±0.06ms	4.5±0.07ms	-2.17%
did_change_with_caching	3.0±0.11s	3.0±0.05s	0.00%
document_symbol	953.1±19.81µs	959.3±22.85µs	+0.65%
format	73.8±0.58ms	73.8±1.05ms	0.00%
goto_definition	359.9±4.68µs	364.6±4.49µs	+1.31%
highlight	8.9±0.02ms	8.8±0.10ms	-1.12%
hover	487.4±6.21µs	488.2±5.52µs	+0.16%
idents_at_position	123.3±0.41µs	123.8±0.39µs	+0.41%
inlay_hints	658.1±35.65µs	658.2±13.16µs	+0.02%
on_enter	466.4±11.80ns	454.6±13.13ns	-2.53%
parent_decl_at_position	3.6±0.03ms	3.6±0.02ms	0.00%
prepare_rename	361.9±2.97µs	364.4±7.16µs	+0.69%
rename	9.5±0.11ms	9.4±0.23ms	-1.05%
semantic_tokens	951.9±14.21µs	963.9±16.79µs	+1.26%
token_at_position	357.6±3.77µs	355.6±3.07µs	-0.56%
tokens_at_position	3.6±0.05ms	3.6±0.03ms	0.00%
tokens_for_file	417.8±2.24µs	426.2±7.02µs	+2.01%
traverse	41.5±1.20ms	42.7±1.38ms	+2.89%

[github-actions]

Benchmark for ff7b626

Click to view benchmark

Test	Base	PR	%
code_action	5.2±0.13ms	5.3±0.21ms	+1.92%
code_lens	336.2±6.03ns	288.6±7.46ns	-14.16%
compile	3.1±0.05s	3.1±0.07s	0.00%
completion	4.5±0.01ms	4.7±0.19ms	+4.44%
did_change_with_caching	2.9±0.04s	3.0±0.04s	+3.45%
document_symbol	1088.9±128.71µs	1023.5±38.82µs	-6.01%
format	75.0±1.56ms	74.1±1.34ms	-1.20%
goto_definition	364.8±5.56µs	369.0±7.05µs	+1.15%
highlight	8.7±0.17ms	8.8±0.06ms	+1.15%
hover	490.4±4.15µs	491.6±6.33µs	+0.24%
idents_at_position	122.0±0.62µs	125.0±0.82µs	+2.46%
inlay_hints	651.8±28.01µs	659.8±13.45µs	+1.23%
on_enter	459.1±10.14ns	461.6±15.51ns	+0.54%
parent_decl_at_position	3.6±0.03ms	3.6±0.28ms	0.00%
prepare_rename	368.3±5.24µs	368.5±7.04µs	+0.05%
rename	9.3±0.17ms	9.4±0.54ms	+1.08%
semantic_tokens	962.1±23.85µs	954.7±11.83µs	-0.77%
token_at_position	358.2±3.80µs	363.9±7.43µs	+1.59%
tokens_at_position	3.6±0.04ms	3.6±0.02ms	0.00%
tokens_for_file	427.5±3.88µs	419.2±3.30µs	-1.94%
traverse	42.3±0.74ms	42.6±1.29ms	+0.71%

[sdankel]

Does program mean package, as in 1 program per Forc manifest file? And there can be multiple modules (sway files) per program?

[tritao]

Does program mean package, as in 1 program per Forc manifest file? And there can be multiple modules (sway files) per program?

This looks good, but I was wondering the same here. My initial thought was that we would be using Package level caching for this, but Program also seems ok. Still think it would be helpful to address this somehow, as it can get confusing, maybe by documenting what each layer of caching means.

[github-actions]

Benchmark for 4804b0c

Click to view benchmark

Test	Base	PR	%
code_action	6.0±0.26ms	5.4±0.07ms	-10.00%
code_lens	286.1±4.99ns	294.6±9.63ns	+2.97%
compile	3.1±0.04s	3.1±0.04s	0.00%
completion	5.3±0.31ms	4.8±0.07ms	-9.43%
did_change_with_caching	3.0±0.05s	3.0±0.04s	0.00%
document_symbol	1027.0±38.72µs	985.8±24.10µs	-4.01%
format	75.6±1.00ms	74.7±1.17ms	-1.19%
goto_definition	368.6±5.92µs	375.5±9.27µs	+1.87%
highlight	9.2±0.16ms	9.2±0.29ms	0.00%
hover	496.8±11.71µs	493.4±8.84µs	-0.68%
idents_at_position	124.9±0.53µs	124.8±0.71µs	-0.08%
inlay_hints	678.0±21.77µs	674.0±25.82µs	-0.59%
on_enter	473.4±12.70ns	461.4±15.39ns	-2.53%
parent_decl_at_position	4.0±0.15ms	3.8±0.05ms	-5.00%
prepare_rename	370.5±7.72µs	371.1±5.81µs	+0.16%
rename	10.2±0.14ms	9.8±0.17ms	-3.92%
semantic_tokens	995.5±19.11µs	999.9±18.19µs	+0.44%
token_at_position	357.8±4.37µs	365.9±2.77µs	+2.26%
tokens_at_position	3.8±0.13ms	3.8±0.08ms	0.00%
tokens_for_file	433.1±3.18µs	421.7±3.75µs	-2.63%
traverse	41.2±1.23ms	41.3±1.04ms	+0.24%

[JoshuaBatty]

@tritao and @sdankel yeah you're both correct, There is a second terminology refactor that needs to take place to sync the compiler and forc terminology here. I think package over program is the correct choice here personally.