…opment

Autogenerated summaries of each of the compiler passes which allow agents to get the key ideas of a compiler pass, including key input/output invariants, without having to reprocess the file each time. In the subsequent diff this seemed to help.

Optional chaining and other value blocks within try/catch blocks were throwing an Invariant error ("Unexpected terminal in optional") instead of the expected Todo error. This caused hard failures instead of graceful bailouts.

The issue occurred because DropManualMemoization and ValidateExhaustiveDependencies ran before BuildReactiveFunction, and encountered `maybe-throw` terminals in their switch statements without a handler, falling through to the invariant case.

Fixed by adding explicit `maybe-throw` cases in both files that throw the proper Todo error with the message "Support value blocks (conditional, logical, optional chaining, etc) within a try/catch statement".

Also renamed the existing bug test to reflect it's now correctly handled:
- error.bug-invariant-unexpected-terminal-in-optional → error.todo-optional-chaining-within-try-catch

Closes #35570

Fixes a longstanding issue where we didn't support code like `useFoo(value?.bar(), value?.bar()) ?? {}` - we would attempt to construct a ReactiveFunction, recursively processing the blocks, but the inner optional `value?.bar()` wouldn't match with what the outer optional was expecting to find. It's a one-line fix!

Note: memoization in the examples is not ideal, but i've confirmed that it is not strictly related to the optional issue.

# Summary

note: This implements the idea discussed in reactwg/react#389 (comment)

This is a large PR that significantly changes our impurity and ref validation to address multiple issues. The goal is to reduce false positives and make the errors we do report more actionable.

## Validating Against Impure Values In Render

Currently we create `Impure` effects for impure functions like `Date.now()` or `Math.random()`, and then throw if the effect is reachable during render. However, impurity is a property of the resulting value: if the value isn't accessed during render then it's okay: maybe you're console-logging the time while debugging (fine), or storing the impure value into a ref and only accessing it in an effect or event handler (totally ok).

This PR updates to validate that impure values are not transitively consumed during render, building on the new effects system: rather than look at instruction types, we use effects like `Capture a -> b`, `Impure a`, and `Render b` to determine how impure values are introduced and where they flow through the program. We're intentionally conservative, and do _not_ propagate impurity through MaybeCapture effects, which is used for functions we don't have signatures for. This means that things like `identity(performance.now())` drop the impurity. This feels like a good compromise since it means we have very high confidence in the errors that we report and can always add increased strictness later as our confidence increases.

An example error:

```
Error: Cannot access impure value during render

Calling an impure function can produce unstable results that update unpredictably when the component happens to re-render. (https://react.dev/reference/rules/components-and-hooks-must-be-pure#components-and-hooks-must-be-idempotent).

error.invalid-impure-value-in-render-helper.ts:5:17
  3 |   const now = () => Date.now();
  4 |   const render = () => {
> 5 |     return <div>{now()}</div>;
    |                  ^^^^^ Cannot access impure value during render
  6 |   };
  7 |   return <div>{render()}</div>;
  8 | }

error.invalid-impure-value-in-render-helper.ts:3:20
  1 | // @validateNoImpureFunctionsInRender
  2 | function Component() {
> 3 |   const now = () => Date.now();
    |                     ^^^^^^^^^^ `Date.now` is an impure function.
  4 |   const render = () => {
  5 |     return <div>{now()}</div>;
  6 |   };
```

Impure values are allowed to flow into refs, meaning that we now allow `useRef(Date.now())` or `useRef(localFunctionThatReturnsMathDotRandom())` which would have errored previously. The next PR reuses this improved impurity tracking to validate ref access in render as well.

## Refs Now Treated As Impure Values in Render

Reading a ref now produces an `Impure` effect, and reading refs in render is validated using the above validation against impure values in render. The error category and message is customized for refs, we're just reusing the validation implementation. This means you get consistent results for `performance.now()` as for `ref.current`. A nice consistency win.

## Simplified writing-ref validation

Now that _reading_ a ref in render is validated using the impure values infra, I also dramatically simplified ValidateNoRefAccessInRender to focus solely on validation against _writing_ refs during render. It was harder to use the new effects infra for this since we intentionally do not record ref mutations as a `Mutate` effect. So for now, the pass switches on InstructionValue variants. We continue to support the `if (ref.current == null) { ref.current = <init> }` pattern and reasonable variants of it. We're conservative about what we consider to be a write of a ref - `foo(ref)` now assumes you're not mutating rather than the inverse.

# Takeaways

* Impure-values-in-render logic is more conservative about what it considers an error (ie to users it appears more persmissive). We follow clearly identifiable (and if we wanted traceable/explainable) paths from impure sources through to where they are rendered. We allow many more cases than before, notably `x = foo(ref)` optimistically assumes you don't read the ref. Concretely, this follows from not tracking impure values across MaybeCapture effects.
* No-writing-refs-in-render is also more conservative about what it counts as a write, appearing to users as allowing more cases. We look for very direct evidence of writing to refs, ie `ref.current = <value>` or `ref.current.property = <value>`, and allow potential writes through eg `writeToRef(ref, value)`.