fix: Improve trimming of Swift function names

[Steelskin]

Some Swift for Windows function names were trimmed to incorrect tokens in the UI, resulting in hard-to-read stack traces. For instance, some functions were shown as "throws" and closures were shown as "#1".

This change fixes the former issue by using the correct function name. Closures are now displayed as "closure in <function name>", and initialization expressions are displayed as "initializer expression of <value>", improving the user experience when browsing stack traces.

Legal Boilerplate

Look, I get it. The entity doing business as "Sentry" was incorporated in the State of Delaware in 2015 as Functional Software, Inc. and is gonna need some rights from me in order to utilize my contributions in this here PR. So here's the deal: I retain all rights, title and interest in and to my contributions, and by keeping this boilerplate intact I confirm that Sentry can use, modify, copy, and redistribute my contributions, under Sentry's choice of terms.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 84.21053% with 3 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 77.97%. Comparing base (b5d447d) to head (4ac9f33).
Report is 19 commits behind head on master.

❗ Current head 4ac9f33 differs from pull request most recent head 100c85c

Please upload reports for the commit 100c85c to get more accurate results.

Additional details and impacted files

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##           master   #72335   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   77.97%   77.97%           
=======================================
  Files        6583     6582    -1     
  Lines      293419   293501   +82     
  Branches    50629    50644   +15     
=======================================
+ Hits       228781   228870   +89     
+ Misses      58343    58330   -13     
- Partials     6295     6301    +6     

Files	Coverage Δ
src/sentry/stacktraces/functions.py	96.02% <84.21%> (-0.28%)	⬇️

... and 25 files with indirect coverage changes

[JoshFerge]

thanks for the PR! looking at this now. will make sure it gets reviewed.

[brustolin]

Everything seems good to me, but I think we should keep the closure number.

A function (specially in SwiftUI) may have many closures.
closure #2 in MediaSlideshow.toSources sounds more helpful

[Steelskin]

Everything seems good to me, but I think we should keep the closure number.

A function (specially in SwiftUI) may have many closures. closure #2 in MediaSlideshow.toSources sounds more helpful

The closure code is hard to parse, especially when we are dealing with closures in closures. Right now, on macOS, we just display closure. On Windows, we don't display the right closure number if we are in a closure in a closure. I feel like the current PR is an improvement for both cases. And with #72336 fixed, we can have the full prototype on hover.