Don't check unnecessarily that impl trait is RPIT
We have this random `return_type_impl_trait` function to detect if a function returns an RPIT which is used in outlives suggestions, but removing it doesn't actually change any diagnostics. Let's just remove it.
Also, suppress a spurious outlives error from a ReError.
Fixes#114274
Map RPITIT's opaque type bounds back from projections to opaques
An RPITIT in a program's AST is eventually translated into both a projection GAT and an opaque. The opaque is used for default trait methods, like:
```
trait Foo {
fn bar() -> impl Sized { 0i32 }
}
```
The item bounds for both the projection and opaque are identical, and both have a *projection* self ty. This is mostly okay, since we can normalize this projection within the default trait method body to the opaque, but it does two things:
1. it leads to bugs in places where we don't normalize item bounds, like `deduce_future_output_from_obligations`
2. it leads to extra match arms that are both suspicious looking and also easy to miss
This PR maps the opaque type bounds of the RPITIT's *opaque* back to the opaque's self type to avoid this quirk. Then we can fix the UI test for #108304 (1.) and also remove a bunch of match arms (2.).
Fixes#108304
r? `@spastorino`
Make RPITITs assume/require their parent method's predicates
Removes a FIXME from the `param_env` query where we were manually adding the parent function's predicates to the RPITIT's assumptions.
r? `@spastorino`
Error when RPITITs' hidden types capture more lifetimes than their trait definitions
This implements a stricter set of captures rules for RPITITs. They now may only capture:
1. Lifetimes from the impl header (both the self type and any trait substs -- we may want to restrict just to the self type's lifetimes, but the PR makes that easy to do, too)
2. Lifetimes mentioned by the `impl Trait` in the trait method's definition.
Namely, they may not mention lifetimes from the method (early or late) that are not mentioned in the `impl Trait`.
cc #105258 which I think was trying to do this too, though I'm not super familiar with what exactly differs from that or why that one was broken.
cc #112194 (doesn't fix this issue per se, because it's still an open question, but I think this is objectively better than the status quo, and gets us closer to resolving that issue.)
Technically is a fix for the ICE in #108580, but it turns that issue into an error now. We can decide separately whether or not nested RPITITs should capture lifetimes from their parents.
r? ``@oli-obk``
Michael Goulet