rename erase_regions to erase_and_anonymize_regions

[BoxyUwU]

I find it consistently confusing that erase_regions does more than replacing regions with 'erased. it also makes some code look real goofy to be writing manual folders to erase regions with a comment saying "we cant use erase regions" :> or code that re-calls erase_regions on types with regions already erased just to anonymize all the bound regions.

r? lcnr

idk how i feel about the name being almost twice as long now

[rustbot]

HIR ty lowering was modified

cc @fmease

Some changes occurred in compiler/rustc_codegen_gcc

cc @antoyo, @GuillaumeGomez

Some changes occurred to the CTFE / Miri interpreter

cc @rust-lang/miri

Some changes occurred in match checking

cc @Nadrieril

Some changes occurred to MIR optimizations

cc @rust-lang/wg-mir-opt

Some changes occurred to the CTFE / Miri interpreter

cc @rust-lang/miri, @RalfJung, @oli-obk, @lcnr

Some changes occurred in src/tools/clippy

cc @rust-lang/clippy

Some changes occurred to the core trait solver

cc @rust-lang/initiative-trait-system-refactor

Some changes occurred to the CTFE machinery

cc @RalfJung, @oli-obk, @lcnr

[lcnr]

a bunch of driveby cleanups

r=me

I think the name being longer is fine :3

View changes since this review

[BoxyUwU]

@bors r=lcnr rollup=never

[bors]

📌 Commit 300c85e has been approved by lcnr

It is now in the queue for this repository.

[bors]

☔ The latest upstream changes (presumably #145711) made this pull request unmergeable. Please resolve the merge conflicts.

[jieyouxu]

Merge conflicts.
@bors r-

[BoxyUwU]

:(

[rustbot]

This PR was rebased onto a different master commit. Here's a range-diff highlighting what actually changed.

Rebasing is a normal part of keeping PRs up to date, so no action is needed—this note is just to help reviewers.

[lcnr]

@bors r=lcnr rollup=iffy

[bors]

📌 Commit 8cde544 has been approved by lcnr

It is now in the queue for this repository.

[bors]

⌛ Testing commit 8cde544 with merge 364da5d...

[bors]

☀️ Test successful - checks-actions
Approved by: lcnr
Pushing 364da5d to master...

[github-actions]

What is this?

This is an experimental post-merge analysis report that shows differences in test outcomes between the merged PR and its parent PR.

Comparing be8de5d (parent) -> 364da5d (this PR)

Test differences

Show 8 test diffs

8 doctest diffs were found. These are ignored, as they are noisy.

Test dashboard

Run

cargo run --manifest-path src/ci/citool/Cargo.toml -- \
    test-dashboard 364da5d88d772fa40fb20353443595385443ac25 --output-dir test-dashboard

And then open test-dashboard/index.html in your browser to see an overview of all executed tests.

Job duration changes

1. dist-aarch64-apple: 5899.9s -> 8344.1s (41.4%)
2. aarch64-apple: 6730.6s -> 4547.4s (-32.4%)
3. pr-check-1: 1373.7s -> 1776.8s (29.3%)
4. dist-apple-various: 4389.4s -> 3196.5s (-27.2%)
5. x86_64-gnu-llvm-19: 2433.5s -> 2825.7s (16.1%)
6. x86_64-gnu-aux: 6319.7s -> 7281.2s (15.2%)
7. pr-check-2: 2136.2s -> 2445.1s (14.5%)
8. x86_64-gnu-llvm-20-1: 3219.9s -> 3605.4s (12.0%)
9. arm-android: 5712.7s -> 6372.4s (11.5%)
10. aarch64-gnu-debug: 3714.2s -> 4128.7s (11.2%)

How to interpret the job duration changes?

Job durations can vary a lot, based on the actual runner instance
that executed the job, system noise, invalidated caches, etc. The table above is provided
mostly for t-infra members, for simpler debugging of potential CI slow-downs.

[rust-timer]

Finished benchmarking commit (364da5d): comparison URL.

Overall result: no relevant changes - no action needed

@rustbot label: -perf-regression

Instruction count

This benchmark run did not return any relevant results for this metric.

Max RSS (memory usage)

This benchmark run did not return any relevant results for this metric.

Cycles

This benchmark run did not return any relevant results for this metric.

Binary size

This benchmark run did not return any relevant results for this metric.

Bootstrap: 467.841s -> 468.052s (0.05%)
Artifact size: 387.52 MiB -> 387.52 MiB (-0.00%)