Marks search-based usages as definitions or references

[kritzcreek]

Closes https://linear.app/sourcegraph/issue/GRAPH-712/determine-usage-kind-for-search-based-usages-by-running-symbol-search

We do this by running a type:symbol search and marking all overlapping results as definitions

Test plan

Here's an example query to run in the API console

[kritzcreek]

I might've out-gitted myself and needed to reflog my way out :D

[varungandhi-src]

Looks OK but let's reduce the code duplication

[varungandhi-src]

Should this be taking in a commit parameter similar to the function above or is that deliberately omitted?

[varungandhi-src]

Before this call, it might be useful to do something like:

trace = trace.With(log.String("language", language), log.String("symbolName", symbolName), log.Int("syntacticUploadID", syntacticUploadID))

This will create a new TraceLogger which auto-attaches the supplied values to subsequent messages (such as the Warn call)

[kritzcreek]

Should this be taking in a commit parameter similar to the function above or is that deliberately omitted?

It's delibarately omitted. Specifying a rev parameter on a symbol seemingly makes it return nothing, but now that I think about it that would mean we should only do definition detection for current HEAD. I'll take another look at what the webapp does.

[varungandhi-src]

Specifying a rev parameter on a symbol seemingly makes it return nothing

That shouldn't be happening 🤔 For example:

https://sourcegraph.sourcegraph.com/search?q=context:global+repo:%5Egithub%5C.com/sourcegraph/conc%24+rev:v0.3.0+type:symbol+Pool&patternType=keyword&sm=0

[kritzcreek]

I'm very confused still, but you're right in all my current testing it's fine to filter by rev for symbol search. I've unified the query generation and search arguments.

[varungandhi-src]

Normally I'd suggest following a rule of 3, but given that the implementation is largely the same as that for findCandidateOccurrencesViaSearch (and AFAICT we don't expect it to change much in the future), thoughts on combining the implementation for the two?