…atisfied diagnostics

bump up x version

Refactor code

The naming of `machine` only makes sense from a mir interpreter internals perspective, but outside users talk about the `target` platform

…li-obk

Migrating rustc_infer to session diagnostics (part 4)

`@rustbot` label +A-translation
r? rust-lang/diagnostics
cc rust-lang#100717

…rister

Fix unintentional UB in ui tests

`@matthiaskrgr` found UB in a bunch of the ui tests. This PR fixes a batch of miscellaneous tests I didn't think needed reviewers from a particular part of the project.

…l, r=lcnr

Make `InferCtxt::can_eq` and `InferCtxt::can_sub` return booleans

Nobody matches on the result, nor does the result return anything useful...

make x look for x.py if shell script does not exist

Fixes rust-lang#107907

Manually tested by doing the following after changes were made:
1. `cargo install --path src/tools/x`
2. checked out old version:  commit hash `775c3c0` from rust-lang#99992
3. Ran `x --help` and it works. Previously, it was giving the error `x.py not found`

Use `target` instead of `machine` for mir interpreter integer handling.

The naming of `machine` only makes sense from a mir interpreter internals perspective, but outside users talk about the `target` platform. As per rust-lang#108029 (comment)

r? `@RalfJung`

…=compiler-errors

Don't suggest `#[doc(hidden)]` trait methods with matching return type

Fixes rust-lang#107983, addressing the bad suggestion.
The test can probably be made more specific to this  case, but I'm unsure how.

`@rustbot` label +A-diagnostics

…bad-impl-trait, r=petrochenkov

Better names for illegal impl trait positions

Just some wording tweaks, no behavior changes.

…otriddle

rustdoc: Use more let chain

Got the idea after yesterday's review.

r? `@notriddle`

clarify correctness of `black_box`

Resolves rust-lang#107957, as described in the related issue.

No code changes, just documentation.

Demonstrate I/O in File examples

I've noticed that some Rust novices unnecessarily reinvent `std::fs::{read,write}`, presumably because they search for equivalents of `fopen` + `fwrite`. I've added links to `std::fs::{read,write}` in the docs.

The `File` examples were only showing how to open a file, but not how to use the opened handle, unnecessarily leaving out the next step. I've added a variety of different uses of file handles to their examples in docs.