Clean up IR diagnostics

[cristianoc]

Summary

• rename internal -bs-diagnose to -debug-ir
• replace module-global dump counters with a per-compilation Ir_diagnostics context
• write deterministic artifacts under <output-prefix>.debug-ir/
• remove stale recognized artifacts before each run
• remove Js_pass_debug and the no-longer-needed CPPO pass for lam_util
• add an integration test covering artifacts, numbering, stale cleanup, and rescript clean

Why

The old counters lived for the entire compiler process, so names depended on earlier compilations and made reentrant/multi-file use order-dependent. Artifacts were scattered next to source inputs and accumulated stale files. A compiler-owned directory and per-compilation state make the debug facility recognizable, deterministic, and easy to clean.

-debug-ir remains an umbrella debug mode and implies Lambda invariant checking, while -check-lam stays independently usable.

Validation

• make test
• focused debug_ir build integration test
• native and browser compiler builds
• unchanged optimized browser bundle size
• make checkformat

Stack

This is PR 2 of 2 and depends on #8534. Its base should be changed to master after #8534 merges.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

❌ Patch coverage is 89.61039% with 8 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.
✅ Project coverage is 74.70%. Comparing base (c478363) to head (5039bdb).

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
compiler/core/lam_util.ml	87.50%	6 Missing ⚠️
compiler/core/ir_diagnostics.ml	92.59%	2 Missing ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master    #8535      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   74.59%   74.70%   +0.10%     
==========================================
  Files         458      460       +2     
  Lines       62303    62389      +86     
==========================================
+ Hits        46476    46608     +132     
+ Misses      15827    15781      -46     

Files with missing lines	Coverage Δ
compiler/bsc/rescript_compiler_main.ml	71.63% <100.00%> (ø)
compiler/common/ext_log.ml	66.66% <100.00%> (+66.66%)	⬆️
compiler/common/js_config.ml	66.66% <ø> (ø)
compiler/core/ir_diagnostics.ml	92.59% <92.59%> (ø)
compiler/core/lam_util.ml	89.83% <87.50%> (ø)

... and 7 files with indirect coverage changes

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

• ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.
• 📦 JS Bundle Analysis: Save yourself from yourself by tracking and limiting bundle sizes in JS merges.

[pkg-pr-new]

Open in StackBlitz

rescript

npm i https://pkg.pr.new/rescript@8535

@rescript/darwin-arm64

npm i https://pkg.pr.new/@rescript/darwin-arm64@8535

@rescript/darwin-x64

npm i https://pkg.pr.new/@rescript/darwin-x64@8535

@rescript/linux-arm64

npm i https://pkg.pr.new/@rescript/linux-arm64@8535

@rescript/linux-x64

npm i https://pkg.pr.new/@rescript/linux-x64@8535

@rescript/runtime

npm i https://pkg.pr.new/@rescript/runtime@8535

@rescript/win32-x64

npm i https://pkg.pr.new/@rescript/win32-x64@8535

commit: 5039bdb

[cknitt]

@codex review

[chatgpt-codex-connector]

Codex Review: Didn't find any major issues. Bravo.

Reviewed commit: 9f43537a70

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

• Open a pull request for review
• Mark a draft as ready
• Comment "@codex review".

If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.

Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".

[cknitt]

Slightly confusing that some of these files have the extension .jsx, which does not mean React JSX here.

Maybe we could change that extension in a separate PR?

[github-actions]

Developer playground preview: https://rescript-lang.github.io/rescript/dev-playground/?version=pr-8535