Lint elided lifetimes in path during lifetime resolution.

[cjgillot]

The lifetime elision lint is known to be brittle and can be redundant with later lifetime resolution errors. This PR aims to remove the redundancy by performing the lint after lifetime resolution.

This PR proposes to carry the information that an elision should be linted against by using a special LifetimeName. I am not certain this is the best solution, but it is certainly the easiest.

Fixes#60199
Fixes#55768
Fixes#63110
Fixes#71957

[rust-highfive]

r? @matthewjasper

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

[jackh726]

Overall looks good. Didn't give this a super close read yet, but had some thoughts.

[jackh726]

r? @jackh726

[cjgillot]

@bors try @rust-timer queue

[rust-timer]

Awaiting bors try build completion.

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

[bors]

⌛ Trying commit dd28f96 with merge 15577f9bb6cc47d19e4ab586f20ba64f7fe26b01...

[bors]

☀️ Try build successful - checks-actions
Build commit: 15577f9bb6cc47d19e4ab586f20ba64f7fe26b01 (15577f9bb6cc47d19e4ab586f20ba64f7fe26b01)

[rust-timer]

Queued 15577f9bb6cc47d19e4ab586f20ba64f7fe26b01 with parent 6d246f0, future comparison URL.

[rust-timer]

Finished benchmarking commit (15577f9bb6cc47d19e4ab586f20ba64f7fe26b01): comparison url.

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

• Large improvement in instruction counts (up to -3.9% on incr-unchanged builds of deep-vector)

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

[cjgillot]

@jackh726 the variant with Implicit(bool) is here: #91271

Finished benchmarking commit (3a16e8d): comparison url.

Summary: This change led to large relevant mixed results shrug in compiler performance.

* Large improvement in instruction counts (up to -3.9% on `incr-unchanged` builds of `deep-vector`)
* Moderate regression in instruction counts (up to 1.4% on `incr-unchanged` builds of `wg-grammar`)

[jackh726]

I'm going to go ahead and say that I prefer #91271. Aside from wg-grammar opt, perf is pretty similar. I would attribute that to as maybe just noise. However, that PR looks much cleaner imo. That said, it does look like the "Probably a nicer way to do this would be to make new_implicit_lifetime just take a missing: bool arg" comment got missed in this PR but is present there.

r=me on the variant PR once fmt done + CI green. Or r=me on this PR with above comment addressed.

[cjgillot]

@bors r=jackh726

[bors]

📌 Commit aa2450f has been approved by jackh726

[bors]

⌛ Testing commit aa2450f with merge 76938d6...

[bors]

☀️ Test successful - checks-actions
Approved by: jackh726
Pushing 76938d6 to master...

[rust-timer]

Finished benchmarking commit (76938d6): comparison url.

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

• Large improvement in instruction counts (up to -1.4% on incr-unchanged builds of stm32f4)

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

@rustbot label: -perf-regression