Make eager service registration explicit and revisit existing one

[jrieken]

The registerSingleton-function supports a supportsDelayedInstantiation-argument.

With InstantiationType.Delayed only proxies of services are injected and the actual instantiation happens in "slack/idle" time or at time of first actual use (whatever comes first). This is often overlooked and the default (false, eager) is used. This issue is about:

• revisit existing eager usages and check if they can support delayed instantiation. This is the preferred way, helps startup performance 🐎 , and is usually possible
• make the eager variant explicit, use InstantiationType.Eager, and feel a little bad about it 😳

Note that Eager should only be needed if your service is doing something "by its own", like reading files or so, which is vital to other parts of the system. This should be the exception because most services offer something (a service) to others which means can be delayed until needed

[jrieken]

@sandy081 starting with you because many of your services show as eager

[sandy081]

@jrieken adopted those service I own

[jrieken]

@bpasero you are next :-)

[bpasero]

Went over the ones I consider owning and found some that can be lazy: #159899

Some observations:

• would be nice to somehow signal back that service cannot be lazy so that we know which ones are not acknowledged (I guess that is the purpose of this issue but might be nicer to validate in code)
• services that are implemented from a workbench part are instantiated on startup anyway because workbench parts are never lazy (even when hidden)
• I was not so sure for the ext-host services, they seem to require the main side proxy in their constructor so I left them, maybe we do a pass at once in those

[bpasero]

Also did #159972 which forces every remote service (i.e. a service that talks to the main process or shared process) to be lazy. All of these services did already declare laziness but now its just enabled by default.

[jrieken]

would be nice to somehow signal back that service cannot be lazy so that we know which ones are not acknowledged (I guess that is the purpose of this issue but might be nicer to validate in code)

I like - I'll add another falsy value like "eager" or so

[jrieken]

#160061

[jrieken]

Thanks everyone!