Rollup merge of #128033 - Nadrieril:explain-empty-wildcards, r=compiler-errors

Explain why we require `_` for empty patterns

This adds a note to the "non-exhaustive patterns" diagnostic to explain why we sometimes require extra `_` patterns on empty types. This is one of the two diagnostic improvements I wanted to do before [stabilizing `min_exhaustive_patterns`](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/122792).

r? ``@compiler-errors``

1 files changed, 7 insertions, 1 deletions

diff --git a/compiler/rustc_pattern_analysis/src/rustc.rs b/compiler/rustc_pattern_analysis/src/rustc.rs
index d17ee8bff50..6ef2d69273e 100644
--- a/compiler/rustc_pattern_analysis/src/rustc.rs
+++ b/compiler/rustc_pattern_analysis/src/rustc.rs
@@ -40,9 +40,15 @@ pub type WitnessPat<'p, 'tcx> = crate::pat::WitnessPat<RustcPatCtxt<'p, 'tcx>>;
 ///
 /// Use `.inner()` or deref to get to the `Ty<'tcx>`.
 #[repr(transparent)]
-#[derive(Clone, Copy)]
+#[derive(Clone, Copy, PartialEq, Eq, Hash)]
 pub struct RevealedTy<'tcx>(Ty<'tcx>);
 
+impl<'tcx> fmt::Display for RevealedTy<'tcx> {
+    fn fmt(&self, fmt: &mut fmt::Formatter<'_>) -> fmt::Result {
+        self.0.fmt(fmt)
+    }
+}
+
 impl<'tcx> fmt::Debug for RevealedTy<'tcx> {
     fn fmt(&self, fmt: &mut fmt::Formatter<'_>) -> fmt::Result {
         self.0.fmt(fmt)