Add detection of [Partial]Ord methods in the ambiguous_wide_pointer_comparisons lint

[Urgau]

Partially addresses #121264 by adding diagnostics items for PartialOrd and Ord methods, detecting such diagnostics items as "binary operation" and suggesting the correct replacement.

I also took the opportunity to change the suggestion to use new methods .cast() on *mut T an d *const T.

[rustbot]

r? @estebank

rustbot has assigned @estebank.
They will have a look at your PR within the next two weeks and either review your PR or reassign to another reviewer.

Use r? to explicitly pick a reviewer

[bors]

☔ The latest upstream changes (presumably #119673) made this pull request unmergeable. Please resolve the merge conflicts.

[Urgau]

@estebank ping.

[Urgau]

r? compiler

[Urgau]

r? @Nadrieril (as discussed privately)

[Urgau]

I've addressed all the review comments and CI passes; this is ready.

@rustbot ready

[Nadrieril]

Thanks!

@bors r+

[bors]

📌 Commit d4b514f has been approved by Nadrieril

It is now in the queue for this repository.

[bors]

⌛ Testing commit d4b514f with merge af4a5a1...

[bors]

☀️ Test successful - checks-actions
Approved by: Nadrieril
Pushing af4a5a1 to master...

[rust-timer]

Finished benchmarking commit (af4a5a1): comparison URL.

Overall result: ❌✅ regressions and improvements - ACTION NEEDED

Next Steps: If you can justify the regressions found in this perf run, please indicate this with @rustbot label: +perf-regression-triaged along with sufficient written justification. If you cannot justify the regressions please open an issue or create a new PR that fixes the regressions, add a comment linking to the newly created issue or PR, and then add the perf-regression-triaged label to this PR.

@rustbot label: +perf-regression
cc @rust-lang/wg-compiler-performance

Instruction count

This is a highly reliable metric that was used to determine the overall result at the top of this comment.

	mean	range	count
Regressions ❌ (primary)	-	-	0
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	2.2%	[2.2%, 2.2%]	1
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-0.5%	[-0.7%, -0.3%]	2
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-1.4%	[-3.5%, -0.2%]	3
All ❌✅ (primary)	-0.5%	[-0.7%, -0.3%]	2

Max RSS (memory usage)

Results

This is a less reliable metric that may be of interest but was not used to determine the overall result at the top of this comment.

	mean	range	count
Regressions ❌ (primary)	-	-	0
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	2.3%	[2.3%, 2.3%]	1
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-	-	0
All ❌✅ (primary)	-	-	0

Cycles

Results

This is a less reliable metric that may be of interest but was not used to determine the overall result at the top of this comment.

	mean	range	count
Regressions ❌ (primary)	-	-	0
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	3.4%	[2.3%, 4.2%]	3
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-	-	0
All ❌✅ (primary)	-	-	0

Binary size

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

Bootstrap: 669.534s -> 667.985s (-0.23%)
Artifact size: 315.85 MiB -> 315.84 MiB (-0.00%)

[Nadrieril]

One secondary regression on incr alongside some improvements even on the same bench, nothing to worry about