Remove in_band_lifetimes from rustc_infer

[LegionMammal978]

See #91867 for more information.

This crate actually had a typo 'ctx in one of its functions:

-pub fn same_type_modulo_infer(a: Ty<'tcx>, b: Ty<'ctx>) -> bool {
+pub fn same_type_modulo_infer<'tcx>(a: Ty<'tcx>, b: Ty<'tcx>) -> bool {

Also, I wasn't entirely sure about the lifetimes in suggest_new_region_bound:

 pub fn suggest_new_region_bound(
-    tcx: TyCtxt<'tcx>,
+    tcx: TyCtxt<'_>,
     err: &mut DiagnosticBuilder<'_>,
     fn_returns: Vec<&rustc_hir::Ty<'_>>,

Should all of those lifetimes really be distinct?

[rust-highfive]

Thanks for the pull request, and welcome! The Rust team is excited to review your changes, and you should hear from @estebank (or someone else) soon.

Please see the contribution instructions for more information.

[LegionMammal978]

Where is mingw-check getting its alternate version of compiler/rustc_infer/src/traits/mod.rs from?

[scottmcm]

Maybe try a rebase? It looks like your parent commit is from 3 days ago, so your file is https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/cc6b36d6424479644dbf740291c7f5a958ddc7f6/compiler/rustc_infer/src/traits/mod.rs#L72 whereas there's a new block on master: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/master/compiler/rustc_infer/src/traits/mod.rs#L72

This crate actually had a typo 'ctx in one of its functions

Ooh, that's a really nice example. Good find! 👍

Should all of those lifetimes really be distinct?

Given that the function returns unit and is all safe code, it's fine so long as it compiles.

[Aaron1011]

r? @Aaron1011

[Aaron1011]

@bors r+

[bors]

📌 Commit 3755240 has been approved by Aaron1011

[Aaron1011]

@bors rollup