feat: analyse callgraph to infer effects (and reduce order edges)

[acl-cqc]

follows #2024, includes cherry-pick of #2034.
closes #1748.

check_call and synthesize_call take an extra parameter that identifies the callee (and the caller is in the Context), this is then added to the callgraph inside the ENGINE. After checking is finished, we process that to calculate effects and put that in the CompilerContext.

There are quite a few places where we have to fall back to using [Effect.ANY], which I guess is much where we are before the PR, but it's not clear how to move them forward; e.g. nested functions.

Tracing is a serious issue; IIUC we have done callgraph analysis before we do any tracing. We should probably rerun it - after every new function/instantiation is checked by tracing, and before the traced function calls it - but how? The big tracing refactor seems like a good solution...

Also needs some more refactoring, there's a lot of instanceof - I think adding a def effects to CallableDef (not just CompiledCallableDef) would help, will do that shortly.

[github-actions]

Bencher Report

Branch	acl/callgraph
Testbed	Linux

🚨 1 Alert

Benchmark	Measure Units	View	Benchmark Result (Result Δ%)	Upper Boundary (Limit %)
tests/benchmarks/test_big_array.py::test_big_array_compile	hugr_bytes bytes x 1e3	📈 plot 🚷 threshold 🚨 alert (🔔)	148.89 x 1e3 (+23.39%) Baseline: 120.67 x 1e3	121.87 x 1e3 (122.16%)

Click to view all benchmark results

Benchmark	hugr_bytes	Benchmark Result bytes x 1e3 (Result Δ%)	Upper Boundary bytes x 1e3 (Limit %)	hugr_nodes	Benchmark Result nodes (Result Δ%)	Upper Boundary nodes (Limit %)
tests/benchmarks/test_big_array.py::test_big_array_compile	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold 🚨 view alert (🔔)	148.89 x 1e3 (+23.39%) Baseline: 120.67 x 1e3	121.87 x 1e3 (122.16%)	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	5,659.00 (0.00%) Baseline: 5,659.00	5,715.59 (99.01%)
tests/benchmarks/test_ctrl_flow.py::test_many_ctrl_flow_compile	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	35.52 x 1e3 (-1.85%) Baseline: 36.19 x 1e3	36.55 x 1e3 (97.17%)	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	1,582.00 (0.00%) Baseline: 1,582.00	1,597.82 (99.01%)
tests/benchmarks/test_queue_push_pop.py::test_queue_push_benchmark_compile	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	9.76 x 1e3 (-1.91%) Baseline: 9.95 x 1e3	10.05 x 1e3 (97.12%)	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	347.00 (0.00%) Baseline: 347.00	350.47 (99.01%)
tests/benchmarks/test_queue_push_pop.py::test_queue_push_pop_benchmark_compile	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	13.71 x 1e3 (-2.78%) Baseline: 14.11 x 1e3	14.25 x 1e3 (96.26%)	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	470.00 (0.00%) Baseline: 470.00	474.70 (99.01%)

🐰 View full continuous benchmarking report in Bencher

[codecov-commenter]

Codecov Report

❌ Patch coverage is 92.06349% with 10 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.
✅ Project coverage is 93.10%. Comparing base (6b66fd4) to head (f9d5e56).

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
...ls/src/guppylang_internals/checker/expr_checker.py	76.47%	8 Missing ⚠️
...src/guppylang_internals/checker/effects_checker.py	97.77%	1 Missing ⚠️
...s/src/guppylang_internals/std/_internal/checker.py	83.33%	1 Missing ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@                   Coverage Diff                    @@
##           acl/order_by_effects    #2035      +/-   ##
========================================================
+ Coverage                 93.06%   93.10%   +0.03%     
========================================================
  Files                       154      155       +1     
  Lines                     14749    14833      +84     
========================================================
+ Hits                      13726    13810      +84     
  Misses                     1023     1023              

☔ View full report in Codecov by Harness.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

• ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.