Bubble opaque types into aggregates to produce more precise diagnostics on aggregate constructors

[oli-obk]

Follow up to #95767

This may be a bit overkill, but I'm exploring multiple paths to get the same better diagnostics

r? @ghost

[oli-obk]

@bors try @rust-timer queue

[rust-timer]

Awaiting bors try build completion.

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

[bors]

⌛ Trying commit cd61e54 with merge fc08ecd2fd1c5224b9078bcff2152d19e82525b2...

[compiler-errors]

The diagnostic improvements in these UI tests here are great! ✨
love seeing tighter/more descriptive spans on errors.

[bors]

☀️ Try build successful - checks-actions
Build commit: fc08ecd2fd1c5224b9078bcff2152d19e82525b2 (fc08ecd2fd1c5224b9078bcff2152d19e82525b2)

[rust-timer]

Queued fc08ecd2fd1c5224b9078bcff2152d19e82525b2 with parent fa72316, future comparison URL.

[oli-obk]

I just realized that deaggregating before borrowck gives us an even better solution without having to make mir building more complex.

I guess i'll start looking into that again xD

[rust-timer]

Finished benchmarking commit (fc08ecd2fd1c5224b9078bcff2152d19e82525b2): comparison url.

Summary:

• Primary benchmarks: no relevant changes found
• Secondary benchmarks: mixed results

	Regressions 😿 (primary)	Regressions 😿 (secondary)	Improvements 🎉 (primary)	Improvements 🎉 (secondary)	All 😿 🎉 (primary)
count1	0	3	0	4	0
mean2	N/A	0.3%	N/A	-0.5%	N/A
max	N/A	0.4%	N/A	-0.7%	N/A

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

Footnotes

1. number of relevant changes ↩

2. the arithmetic mean of the percent change ↩

[oli-obk]

Closing this PR, as it's definitely not my preferred route to go about this