Remove 'simple array' lowering of format_args!().

[m-ou-se]

format_args!() uses a simpler (faster to compile) lowering in simple cases. However, selecting that case is somewhat complicated, as it does not work if any argument beyond the first one contains a yield point, so we have to check for that.

As part of the solution for #92698 and #139136, it might need to get even more complicated, checking for any lifetime-extended temporaries or any const-promotable expressions.

This is an experiment to see the impact of just removing this optimization.

This has been tried before with slightly negative results, but maybe things have changed by now. :)

[m-ou-se]

@bors try @rust-timer queue

[bors]

⌛ Trying commit e039260 with merge 19f2dc7...

[bors]

☀️ Try build successful - checks-actions
Build commit: 19f2dc7 (19f2dc79c8367193769b0dcdf54aa35bb22357d1)

[m-ou-se]

@rust-timer build 19f2dc7

[rust-timer]

Finished benchmarking commit (19f2dc7): comparison URL.

Overall result: ❌✅ regressions and improvements - please read the text below

Benchmarking this pull request likely means that it is perf-sensitive, so we're automatically marking it as not fit for rolling up. While you can manually mark this PR as fit for rollup, we strongly recommend not doing so since this PR may lead to changes in compiler perf.

Next Steps: If you can justify the regressions found in this try perf run, please indicate this with @rustbot label: +perf-regression-triaged along with sufficient written justification. If you cannot justify the regressions please fix the regressions and do another perf run. If the next run shows neutral or positive results, the label will be automatically removed.

@bors rollup=never
@rustbot label: -S-waiting-on-perf +perf-regression

Instruction count

This is the most reliable metric that we have; it was used to determine the overall result at the top of this comment. However, even this metric can sometimes exhibit noise.

	mean	range	count
Regressions ❌ (primary)	0.5%	[0.1%, 1.4%]	59
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	0.2%	[0.1%, 0.3%]	4
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-0.9%	[-0.9%, -0.9%]	1
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-0.3%	[-0.3%, -0.3%]	1
All ❌✅ (primary)	0.4%	[-0.9%, 1.4%]	60

Max RSS (memory usage)

Results (primary 1.2%, secondary -0.4%)

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)	2.4%	[1.4%, 3.8%]	4
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	1.1%	[1.1%, 1.1%]	1
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-3.3%	[-3.3%, -3.3%]	1
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-1.8%	[-1.8%, -1.8%]	1
All ❌✅ (primary)	1.2%	[-3.3%, 3.8%]	5

Cycles

Results (primary 1.0%)

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)	1.2%	[0.5%, 1.9%]	10
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-0.8%	[-0.8%, -0.8%]	1
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-	-	0
All ❌✅ (primary)	1.0%	[-0.8%, 1.9%]	11

Binary size

Results (primary 0.1%, secondary 0.1%)

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)	0.1%	[0.0%, 0.8%]	77
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	0.1%	[0.0%, 0.3%]	12
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-0.3%	[-0.4%, -0.2%]	7
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-	-	0
All ❌✅ (primary)	0.1%	[-0.4%, 0.8%]	84

Bootstrap: 776.145s -> 776.905s (0.10%)
Artifact size: 365.92 MiB -> 365.92 MiB (-0.00%)