Remove drop order twist of && and || and make them associative
Previously a short circuiting binop chain (chain of && or ||s) would drop the temporaries created by the first element after all the other elements, and otherwise follow evaluation order. So `f(1).g() && f(2).g() && f(3).g() && f(4).g()` would drop the temporaries in the order `2,3,4,1`. This made `&&` and `||` non-associative regarding drop order. In other words, adding ()'s to the expression would change drop order: `f(1).g() && (f(2).g() && f(3).g()) && f(4).g()` for example would drop in the order `3,2,4,1`.
As, except for the bool result, there is no data returned by the sub-expressions of the short circuiting binops, we can safely discard of any temporaries created by the sub-expr. Previously, code was already putting the rhs's into terminating scopes, but missed it for the lhs's.
This commit addresses this "twist". We now also put the lhs into a terminating scope. The drop order of the above expressions becomes `1,2,3,4`.
There might be code relying on the current order, and therefore I'd recommend doing a crater run to gauge the impact. I'd argue that such code is already quite wonky as it is one `foo() &&` addition away from breaking. ~~For the impact, I don't expect any *build* failures, as the compiler gets strictly more tolerant: shortening the lifetime of temporaries only expands the list of programs the compiler accepts as valid. There might be *runtime* failures caused by this change however.~~ Edit: both build and runtime failures are possible, e.g. see the example provided by dtolnay [below](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/103293#issuecomment-1285341113). Edit2: the crater run has finished and [results](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/103293#issuecomment-1292275203) are that there is only one build failure which is easy to fix with a +/- 1 line diff.
I've included a testcase that now compiles thanks to this patch.
The breakage is also limited to drop order relative to conditionals in the && chain: that is, in code like this:
```Rust
let hello = foo().hi() && bar().world();
println!("hi");
```
we already drop the temporaries of `foo().hi()` before we reach "hi".
I'd ideally have this PR merged before let chains are stabilized. If this PR is taking too long, I'd love to have a more restricted version of this change limited to `&&`'s in let chains: the `&&`'s of such chains are quite special anyways as they accept `let` bindings, in there the `&&` is therefore more a part of the "if let chain" construct than a construct of its own.
Fixes#103107
Status: waiting on [this accepted FCP](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/103293#issuecomment-1293411354) finishing.
19c250aa12