feat(#77): bytes-without-data lint

[h1alexbel]

In this pull I've introduced new lint: bytes-without-data, that issues critical defect in case of <o/> with base containing org.eolang.bytes (bytes for short) does not have text data inside.

closes #77

[h1alexbel]

@maxonfjvipon please check

[maxonfjvipon]

@h1alexbel let's wait for @yegor256 comment to this

[maxonfjvipon]

@h1alexbel let's put on hold this PR until we fix XMIR so it correspond to EO

[h1alexbel]

@maxonfjvipon is XMIR fixed now? Can we merge this PR?

[maxonfjvipon]

@h1alexbel not yet, I'll let you know

[maxonfjvipon]

@h1alexbel I created a ticket, when it's resolved you can continue

[h1alexbel]

@maxonfjvipon updated. Take a look, please

[h1alexbel]

@maxonfjvipon reminder

[h1alexbel]

@maxonfjvipon reminder

[maxonfjvipon]

@h1alexbel maybe let's add and eo:abstract(.)?

[github-actions]

🚀 Performance Analysis

Test	Base Score	PR Score	Change	% Change	Unit	Mode
benchmarks.ProgramBench.scansXmir	7143.277	7186.002	42.725	0.60%	ms/op	Average Time
benchmarks.ProgramBench.scansXmir	7143.277	8494.358	1351.081	18.91%	ms/op	Average Time
benchmarks.ProgramBench.scansXmir	7143.277	10842.510	3699.233	51.79%	ms/op	Average Time
benchmarks.ProgramBench.scansXmir	7143.277	14302.881	7159.604	100.23%	ms/op	Average Time
benchmarks.ProgramBench.scansXmir	7143.277	60163.905	53020.628	742.25%	ms/op	Average Time
benchmarks.ProgramBench.scansXmir	8072.749	7186.002	-886.747	-10.98%	ms/op	Average Time
benchmarks.ProgramBench.scansXmir	8072.749	8494.358	421.610	5.22%	ms/op	Average Time
benchmarks.ProgramBench.scansXmir	8072.749	10842.510	2769.761	34.31%	ms/op	Average Time
benchmarks.ProgramBench.scansXmir	8072.749	14302.881	6230.132	77.17%	ms/op	Average Time
benchmarks.ProgramBench.scansXmir	8072.749	60163.905	52091.156	645.27%	ms/op	Average Time
benchmarks.ProgramBench.scansXmir	10150.250	7186.002	-2964.248	-29.20%	ms/op	Average Time
benchmarks.ProgramBench.scansXmir	10150.250	8494.358	-1655.891	-16.31%	ms/op	Average Time
benchmarks.ProgramBench.scansXmir	10150.250	10842.510	692.260	6.82%	ms/op	Average Time
benchmarks.ProgramBench.scansXmir	10150.250	14302.881	4152.632	40.91%	ms/op	Average Time
benchmarks.ProgramBench.scansXmir	10150.250	60163.905	50013.655	492.73%	ms/op	Average Time
benchmarks.ProgramBench.scansXmir	13608.615	7186.002	-6422.613	-47.20%	ms/op	Average Time
benchmarks.ProgramBench.scansXmir	13608.615	8494.358	-5114.256	-37.58%	ms/op	Average Time
benchmarks.ProgramBench.scansXmir	13608.615	10842.510	-2766.105	-20.33%	ms/op	Average Time
benchmarks.ProgramBench.scansXmir	13608.615	14302.881	694.267	5.10%	ms/op	Average Time
benchmarks.ProgramBench.scansXmir	13608.615	60163.905	46555.290	342.10%	ms/op	Average Time
benchmarks.ProgramBench.scansXmir	48677.957	7186.002	-41491.956	-85.24%	ms/op	Average Time
benchmarks.ProgramBench.scansXmir	48677.957	8494.358	-40183.599	-82.55%	ms/op	Average Time
benchmarks.ProgramBench.scansXmir	48677.957	10842.510	-37835.448	-77.73%	ms/op	Average Time
benchmarks.ProgramBench.scansXmir	48677.957	14302.881	-34375.076	-70.62%	ms/op	Average Time
benchmarks.ProgramBench.scansXmir	48677.957	60163.905	11485.947	23.60%	ms/op	Average Time
benchmarks.ProgramsBench.scansLargeProgram	23268.703	23563.840	295.136	1.27%	ms/op	Average Time

⚠️ Performance loss: benchmarks.ProgramBench.scansXmir is slower by 42.725 ms/op (0.60%)
⚠️ Performance loss: benchmarks.ProgramBench.scansXmir is slower by 1351.081 ms/op (18.91%)
⚠️ Performance loss: benchmarks.ProgramBench.scansXmir is slower by 3699.233 ms/op (51.79%)
⚠️ Performance loss: benchmarks.ProgramBench.scansXmir is slower by 7159.604 ms/op (100.23%)
❌ Performance loss: benchmarks.ProgramBench.scansXmir is slower by 7159.604 ms/op (100.23%)
⚠️ Performance loss: benchmarks.ProgramBench.scansXmir is slower by 53020.628 ms/op (742.25%)
❌ Performance loss: benchmarks.ProgramBench.scansXmir is slower by 53020.628 ms/op (742.25%)
✅ Performance gain: benchmarks.ProgramBench.scansXmir is faster by 886.747 ms/op (10.98%)
⚠️ Performance loss: benchmarks.ProgramBench.scansXmir is slower by 421.610 ms/op (5.22%)
⚠️ Performance loss: benchmarks.ProgramBench.scansXmir is slower by 2769.761 ms/op (34.31%)
⚠️ Performance loss: benchmarks.ProgramBench.scansXmir is slower by 6230.132 ms/op (77.17%)
⚠️ Performance loss: benchmarks.ProgramBench.scansXmir is slower by 52091.156 ms/op (645.27%)
❌ Performance loss: benchmarks.ProgramBench.scansXmir is slower by 52091.156 ms/op (645.27%)
✅ Performance gain: benchmarks.ProgramBench.scansXmir is faster by 2964.248 ms/op (29.20%)
✅ Performance gain: benchmarks.ProgramBench.scansXmir is faster by 1655.891 ms/op (16.31%)
⚠️ Performance loss: benchmarks.ProgramBench.scansXmir is slower by 692.260 ms/op (6.82%)
⚠️ Performance loss: benchmarks.ProgramBench.scansXmir is slower by 4152.632 ms/op (40.91%)
⚠️ Performance loss: benchmarks.ProgramBench.scansXmir is slower by 50013.655 ms/op (492.73%)
❌ Performance loss: benchmarks.ProgramBench.scansXmir is slower by 50013.655 ms/op (492.73%)
✅ Performance gain: benchmarks.ProgramBench.scansXmir is faster by 6422.613 ms/op (47.20%)
✅ Performance gain: benchmarks.ProgramBench.scansXmir is faster by 5114.256 ms/op (37.58%)
✅ Performance gain: benchmarks.ProgramBench.scansXmir is faster by 2766.105 ms/op (20.33%)
⚠️ Performance loss: benchmarks.ProgramBench.scansXmir is slower by 694.267 ms/op (5.10%)
⚠️ Performance loss: benchmarks.ProgramBench.scansXmir is slower by 46555.290 ms/op (342.10%)
❌ Performance loss: benchmarks.ProgramBench.scansXmir is slower by 46555.290 ms/op (342.10%)
✅ Performance gain: benchmarks.ProgramBench.scansXmir is faster by 41491.956 ms/op (85.24%)
✅ Performance gain: benchmarks.ProgramBench.scansXmir is faster by 40183.599 ms/op (82.55%)
✅ Performance gain: benchmarks.ProgramBench.scansXmir is faster by 37835.448 ms/op (77.73%)
✅ Performance gain: benchmarks.ProgramBench.scansXmir is faster by 34375.076 ms/op (70.62%)
⚠️ Performance loss: benchmarks.ProgramBench.scansXmir is slower by 11485.947 ms/op (23.60%)
⚠️ Performance loss: benchmarks.ProgramsBench.scansLargeProgram is slower by 295.136 ms/op (1.27%)

[h1alexbel]

@maxonfjvipon updated. Take a look, please

[h1alexbel]

@yegor256 take a look, please

[h1alexbel]

@yegor256 reminder

[yegor256]

@rultor merge

[rultor]

@rultor merge

@yegor256 OK, I'll try to merge now. You can check the progress of the merge here.

[rultor]

@rultor merge

@yegor256 Done! FYI, the full log is here (took me 17min).