Rollup merge of #129344 - compiler-errors:less-option-unit-diagnostics, r=jieyouxu

Use `bool` in favor of `Option<()>` for diagnostics

We originally only supported `Option<()>` for optional notes/labels, but we now support `bool`. Let's use that, since it usually leads to more readable code.

I'm not removing the support from the derive macro, though I guess we could error on it... 🤔

1 files changed, 3 insertions, 3 deletions

diff --git a/compiler/rustc_trait_selection/src/errors.rs b/compiler/rustc_trait_selection/src/errors.rs
index 78f1f7d9b9b..5384084f6d7 100644
--- a/compiler/rustc_trait_selection/src/errors.rs
+++ b/compiler/rustc_trait_selection/src/errors.rs
@@ -203,7 +203,7 @@ pub struct AnnotationRequired<'a> {
     #[subdiagnostic]
     pub multi_suggestions: Vec<SourceKindMultiSuggestion<'a>>,
     #[note(trait_selection_full_type_written)]
-    pub was_written: Option<()>,
+    pub was_written: bool,
     pub path: PathBuf,
 }
 
@@ -224,7 +224,7 @@ pub struct AmbiguousImpl<'a> {
     #[subdiagnostic]
     pub multi_suggestions: Vec<SourceKindMultiSuggestion<'a>>,
     #[note(trait_selection_full_type_written)]
-    pub was_written: Option<()>,
+    pub was_written: bool,
     pub path: PathBuf,
 }
 
@@ -245,7 +245,7 @@ pub struct AmbiguousReturn<'a> {
     #[subdiagnostic]
     pub multi_suggestions: Vec<SourceKindMultiSuggestion<'a>>,
     #[note(trait_selection_full_type_written)]
-    pub was_written: Option<()>,
+    pub was_written: bool,
     pub path: PathBuf,
 }