Stop inventing symbol sizes.

MachO and COFF quite reasonably only define the size for common symbols.

We used to try to figure out the "size" by computing the gap from one symbol to
the next.

This would not be correct in general, since a part of a section can belong to no
visible symbol (padding, private globals).

It was also really expensive, since we would walk every symbol to find the size
of one.

If a caller really wants this, it can sort all the symbols once and get all the
gaps ("size") in O(n log n) instead of O(n^2).

On MachO this also has the advantage of centralizing all the checks for an
invalid n_sect.

llvm-svn: 238028