At the moment this only includes type checking and there is no code generation support yet. I wanted to get the design reviewed first.
From discussion with @graydon at #5841, re-implemented as `#[simd]` attribute on structs.
Progressing towards #3499.
r? @ILyoan
This pulls all the logic for discovering the crate entry point into a new pass (out of resolve and typeck), then changes it so that main is only looked for at the crate level (`#[main]` can still be used anywhere).
I don't understand the special android logic here and worry that I may have broken it.
This "finishes" the generic deriving code (which I started in #5640), in the sense it supports everything that I can think of being useful. (Including lifetimes and type parameters on methods and traits, arguments and return values of (almost) any type, static methods.)
It closes#6149, but met with #6257, so the following doesn't work:
```rust
#[deriving(TotalEq)]
struct Foo<'self>(&'self int);
```
(It only fails for `TotalOrd`, `TotalEq` and `Clone`, since they are the only ones that call a method directly on sub-elements of the type, which means that the auto-deref interferes with the pointer.)
It also makes `Rand` (chooses a random variant, fills the fields with random values, including recursively for recursive types) and `ToStr` (`x.to_str()` is the same as `fmt!("%?", x)`) derivable, as well as converting IterBytes to the generic code (which made the code 2.5x shorter, more robust and added support for tuple structs).
({En,De}codable are trickier, so I'll convert them over later.)
`colorcolumn` is now set with `setlocal`, so it doesn't infect the entire session.
`conceal` support is now opt-in, not opt-out. I haven't found anybody that likes it or cares either way.
The indent file now uses `cindent` with appropriate `cinoptions` and `cinkeys`. Auto-indenting an entire file mostly gets the right thing now, with structs and enums not being affects like before. Defaults to the hanging indent style, unless the first argument is on a new line.
There were some keywords in the syntax file that I've never seen (and have been used as identifiers in some tests) so they have been commented out.
