This preempts us from replacing a swizzle incorrectly, as in the
following example:
1: A.x = 1.0
2: A
3: A.x = 2.0
4: @2.x
were @4 ends up being 2.0 instead of 1.0, because that's the value stored in
A.x at time 4, and we should be querying it at time 2.
This also helps us to avoid replacing a swizzle with itself in copy-prop
which can result in infinite loops, as with the included tests this commit.
Consider the following sequence of instructions:
1 : A
2 : B = @1
3 : B
4 : A = @3
5 : @1.x
Current copy-prop would replace 5 so it points to @3 now:
1 : A
2 : B = @1
3 : B
4 : A = @3
5 : @3.x
But in the next iteration it would make it point back to @1, keeping it
spinning infinitively.
The solution is to index the instructions and don't replace the swizzle
if the new load happens after the current load.
The included test fails because copy_propagation_transform_swizzle()
is using the value recorded for the variable when the swizzle is being
read, and not the swizzle's load.
