## Summary
Adds meta information to `Type::Todo`, allowing developers to easily
trace back the origin of a particular `@Todo` type they encounter.
Instead of `Type::Todo`, we now write either `type_todo!()` which
creates a `@Todo[path/to/source.rs:123]` type with file and line
information, or using `type_todo!("PEP 604 unions not supported")`,
which creates a variant with a custom message.
`Type::Todo` now contains a `TodoType` field. In release mode, this is
just a zero-sized struct, in order not to create any overhead. In debug
mode, this is an `enum` that contains the meta information.
`Type` implements `Copy`, which means that `TodoType` also needs to be
copyable. This limits the design space. We could intern `TodoType`, but
I discarded this option, as it would require us to have access to the
salsa DB everywhere we want to use `Type::Todo`. And it would have made
the macro invocations less ergonomic (requiring us to pass `db`).
So for now, the meta information is simply a `&'static str` / `u32` for
the file/line variant, or a `&'static str` for the custom message.
Anything involving a chain/backtrace of several `@Todo`s or similar is
therefore currently not implemented. Also because we currently don't see
any direct use cases for this, and because all of this will eventually
go away.
Note that the size of `Type` increases from 16 to 24 bytes, but only in
debug mode.
## Test Plan
- Observed the changes in Markdown tests.
- Added custom messages for all `Type::Todo`s that were revealed in the
tests
- Ran red knot in release and debug mode on the following Python file:
```py
def f(x: int) -> int:
reveal_type(x)
```
Prints `@Todo` in release mode and `@Todo(function parameter type)` in
debug mode.
## Summary
This fixes an edge case that @carljm and I missed when implementing
https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/pull/13800. Namely, if the left-hand
operand is the _exact same type_ as the right-hand operand, the
reflected dunder on the right-hand operand is never tried:
```pycon
>>> class Foo:
... def __radd__(self, other):
... return 42
...
>>> Foo() + Foo()
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "<python-input-1>", line 1, in <module>
Foo() + Foo()
~~~~~~^~~~~~~
TypeError: unsupported operand type(s) for +: 'Foo' and 'Foo'
```
This edge case _is_ covered in Brett's blog at
https://snarky.ca/unravelling-binary-arithmetic-operations-in-python/,
but I missed it amongst all the other subtleties of this algorithm. The
motivations and history behind it were discussed in
https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-dev@python.org/thread/7NZUCODEAPQFMRFXYRMGJXDSIS3WJYIV/
## Test Plan
I added an mdtest for this cornercase.
