Add a `--compile` option to `pip install` and `pip sync`.
I chose to implement this as a separate pass over the entire venv. If we
wanted to compile during installation, we'd have to make sure that
writing is exclusive, to avoid concurrent processes writing broken
`.pyc` files. Additionally, this ensures that the entire site-packages
are bytecode compiled, even if there are packages that aren't from this
`uv` invocation. The disadvantage is that we do not update RECORD and
rely on this comment from [PEP 491](https://peps.python.org/pep-0491/):
> Uninstallers should be smart enough to remove .pyc even if it is not
mentioned in RECORD.
If this is a problem we can change it to run during installation and
write RECORD entries.
Internally, this is implemented as an async work-stealing subprocess
worker pool. The producer is a directory traversal over site-packages,
sending each `.py` file to a bounded async FIFO queue/channel. Each
worker has a long-running python process. It pops the queue to get a
single path (or exists if the channel is closed), then sends it to
stdin, waits until it's informed that the compilation is done through a
line on stdout, and repeat. This is fast, e.g. installing `jupyter
plotly` on Python 3.12 it processes 15876 files in 319ms with 32 threads
(vs. 3.8s with a single core). The python processes internally calls
`compileall.compile_file`, the same as pip.
Like pip, we ignore and silence all compilation errors
(https://github.com/astral-sh/uv/issues/1559). There is a 10s timeout to
handle the case when the workers got stuck. For the reviewers, please
check if i missed any spots where we could deadlock, this is the hardest
part of this PR.
I've added `uv-dev compile <dir>` and `uv-dev clear-compile <dir>`
commands, mainly for my own benchmarking. I don't want to expose them in
`uv`, they almost certainly not the correct workflow and we don't want
to support them.
Fixes#1788Closes#1559Closes#1928
