Expand potential inner `Or` pattern for THIR
Code assumed there wouldn't be a deeper `Or` pattern inside expanded `PatStack` this fixes it by looking for the `Or` pattern inside expanded `PatStack`.
A more ideal solution would be recursively doing this but I haven't found a good way to do that.
_fixes #97898_
never consider unsafe blocks unused if they would be required with deny(unsafe_op_in_unsafe_fn)
Judging from https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/71668#issuecomment-1200317370 the consensus nowadays seems to be that we should never consider an unsafe block unused if it was required with `deny(unsafe_op_in_unsafe_fn)`, no matter whether that lint is actually enabled or not. So let's adjust rustc accordingly.
The first commit does the change, the 2nd does some cleanup.
Determine match_has_guard from candidates instead of looking up thir table again
Currently looking through mir build of matches because of interest in deref patterns. Finding some micro-optimizable things.
Enable unused_parens for match arms
Fixes: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/92751
Currently I can't get the `stderr` to work with `./x.py test`, but this should fix the issue. Help would be appreciated!
Some `is_useful` cleanups
#98582 was reverted because it was a perf regression.
https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/99806 reintroduces the changes, but this PR picks individual ones that have no regressions.
Let-else: break out scopes when a let-else pattern fails to match
This PR will commit to a new behavior so that values from initializer expressions are dropped earlier when a let-else pattern fails to match.
Fix#98672.
Close#93951.
cc `@camsteffen` `@est31`
Deeply deny fn and raw ptrs in const generics
I think this is right -- just because we wrap a fn ptr in a wrapper type does not mean we should allow it in a const parameter.
We now reject both of these in the same way:
```
#![feature(adt_const_params)]
#[derive(Eq, PartialEq)]
struct Wrapper();
fn foo<const W: Wrapper>() {}
fn foo2<const F: fn()>() {}
```
This does regress one test (`src/test/ui/consts/refs_check_const_eq-issue-88384.stderr`), but I'm not sure it should've passed in the first place.
cc: ``@b-naber`` who introduced that test^
fixes#99641
