Exhaustiveness: reveal opaque types properly
Previously, exhaustiveness had no clear policy around opaque types. In this PR I propose the following policy: within the body of an item that defines the hidden type of some opaque type, exhaustiveness checking on a value of that opaque type is performed using the concrete hidden type inferred in this body.
I'm not sure how consistent this is with other operations allowed on opaque types; I believe this will require FCP.
From what I can tell, this doesn't change anything for non-empty types.
The observable changes are:
- when the real type is uninhabited, matches within the defining scopes can now rely on that for exhaustiveness, e.g.:
```rust
#[derive(Copy, Clone)]
enum Void {}
fn return_never_rpit(x: Void) -> impl Copy {
if false {
match return_never_rpit(x) {}
}
x
}
```
- this properly fixes ICEs like https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/117100 that occurred because a same match could have some patterns where the type is revealed and some where it is not.
Bonus subtle point: if `x` is opaque, a match like `match x { ("", "") => {} ... }` will constrain its type ([playground](https://play.rust-lang.org/?version=nightly&mode=debug&edition=2021&gist=901d715330eac40339b4016ac566d6c3)). This is not the case for `match x {}`: this will not constain the type, and will only compile if something else constrains the type to be empty.
Fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/117100
r? `@oli-obk`
Edited for precision of the wording
[Included](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/116821#issuecomment-1813171764) in the FCP on this PR is this rule:
> Within the body of an item that defines the hidden type of some opaque type, exhaustiveness checking on a value of that opaque type is performed using the concrete hidden type inferred in this body.
c1fc1d18cd