Remove redundant member-constraint check

[oli-obk]

impl trait will, for each lifetime in the hidden type, register a "member constraint" that says the lifetime must be equal or outlive one of the lifetimes of the impl trait. These member constraints will be solved by borrowck

But, as you can see in the big red block of removed code, there was an ad-hoc check for member constraints happening at the site where they get registered. This check had some minor effects on diagnostics, but will fall down on its feet with my big type alias impl trait refactor. So we removed it and I pulled the removal out into a (hopefully) reviewable PR that works on master directly.

[rust-highfive]

r? @nagisa

(rust-highfive has picked a reviewer for you, use r? to override)

[oli-obk]

@bors try @rust-timer queue

[rust-timer]

Awaiting bors try build completion.

@rustbot label: +S-waiting-on-perf

[bors]

⌛ Trying commit d559f5638f04ec9239daff40c99f915724165b69 with merge e5988663b958f804945421ea908975067378270f...

[bors]

☀️ Try build successful - checks-actions
Build commit: e5988663b958f804945421ea908975067378270f (e5988663b958f804945421ea908975067378270f)

[rust-timer]

Queued e5988663b958f804945421ea908975067378270f with parent f06f9bb, future comparison URL.

[rust-timer]

Finished benchmarking commit (e5988663b958f804945421ea908975067378270f): comparison url.

Summary: This change led to very large relevant regressions 😿 in compiler performance.

• Very large regression in instruction counts (up to 208.2% on full builds of wg-grammar)

If you disagree with this performance assessment, please file an issue in rust-lang/rustc-perf.

Benchmarking this pull request likely means that it is perf-sensitive, so we're automatically marking it as not fit for rolling up. While you can manually mark this PR as fit for rollup, we strongly recommend not doing so since this PR led to changes in compiler perf.

Next Steps: If you can justify the regressions found in this try perf run, please indicate this with @rustbot label: +perf-regression-triaged along with sufficient written justification. If you cannot justify the regressions please fix the regressions and do another perf run. If the next run shows neutral or positive results, the label will be automatically removed.

@bors rollup=never
@rustbot label: +S-waiting-on-review -S-waiting-on-perf +perf-regression

[oli-obk]

@bors try @rust-timer queue

[rust-timer]

Awaiting bors try build completion.

@rustbot label: +S-waiting-on-perf

[bors]

⌛ Trying commit dde6581f20262fc84caa19d66ea39973b791f2d6 with merge 7bd51ca41626fd972720681467f74ed48ca6976e...

[oli-obk]

@bors try @rust-timer queue

[rust-timer]

Awaiting bors try build completion.

@rustbot label: +S-waiting-on-perf

[bors]

⌛ Trying commit 13d3eef5abd280a0c7c19160597c579361e5fdfd with merge d554c07b2ff5aaea10eab8489f88180ba5baa6de...

[bors]

☀️ Try build successful - checks-actions
Build commit: d554c07b2ff5aaea10eab8489f88180ba5baa6de (d554c07b2ff5aaea10eab8489f88180ba5baa6de)

[rust-timer]

Queued d554c07b2ff5aaea10eab8489f88180ba5baa6de with parent 218a96c, future comparison URL.

[rust-timer]

Finished benchmarking commit (d554c07b2ff5aaea10eab8489f88180ba5baa6de): comparison url.

Summary: This change led to moderate relevant improvements 🎉 in compiler performance.

• Moderate improvement in instruction counts (up to -1.0% on full builds of wg-grammar)

If you disagree with this performance assessment, please file an issue in rust-lang/rustc-perf.

Benchmarking this pull request likely means that it is perf-sensitive, so we're automatically marking it as not fit for rolling up. While you can manually mark this PR as fit for rollup, we strongly recommend not doing so since this PR led to changes in compiler perf.

@bors rollup=never
@rustbot label: +S-waiting-on-review -S-waiting-on-perf -perf-regression

[jackh726]

@oli-obk I'll try to review this weekend!

[jackh726]

I think this is fine...

I'm seeing some duplicate errors being emitted; it would be nice to not do that, but I'd be fine landing this regardless.

I'm going to go ahead and say r=me here with or without fixing duplicate errors being emitted.

[jackh726]

It's unfortunate that this error gets duplicated. Any particular reason why?

[oli-obk]

somewhat... there are three places that do impl trait checks: typeck, borrowck and wfcheck. I am unsure without running a trace where this specific one is duplicated.

But in any case: I know it disappears with my lazy TAIT branch, and I believe users don't see it anyway due to error deduplication.

[jackh726]

Oh, another thing: Can you squash the last couple commits of just blessing tests?

[oli-obk]

@bors r=jackh726

[bors]

📌 Commit 4413f8c has been approved by jackh726

[bors]

⌛ Testing commit 4413f8c with merge ec724ac...

[bors]

☀️ Test successful - checks-actions
Approved by: jackh726
Pushing ec724ac to master...

[rust-timer]

Finished benchmarking commit (ec724ac): comparison url.

Summary: This benchmark run did not return any relevant changes.

If you disagree with this performance assessment, please file an issue in rust-lang/rustc-perf.

@rustbot label: -perf-regression