stricter hidden type wf-check [based on #115008]
Original work by `@aliemjay` in #115008. A huge thanks to them for originally figuring out this approach ❤️
Fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/114728
Fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/114572
Instead of adding the `WellFormed` obligations when relating opaque types, we now always emit such an obligation when defining the hidden type.
This causes nested opaque types which aren't wf to error, see the comment below for the described impact. I believe this change to be desirable as it significantly reduces complexity by removing special-cases.
It also caused an issue with RPITIT: in defaulted trait methods, we add a `Projection(synthetic_assoc, rpit_of_trait_method)` clause to the `param_env`. This clause is not added to the `ParamEnv` of the nested coroutines. This caused a normalization failure in `fn check_coroutine_obligations` with the new solver. I fixed that by using the env of the typeck root instead.
r? `@oli-obk`
An example directive is ignore-test. In legacy compiletest style, the header
would be written as
// ignore-test
but in ui_test style, the header would be written as
//@ ignore-test
compiletest is changed to accept only //@ directives for UI tests
(currently), and will reject and report an error if it encounters any
comments // <content> that may be parsed as an legacy compiletest-style
test header. To fix this, you should migrate to the ui_test-style header
//@ <content>.
09bc67b915