Auto merge of rust-lang#86386 - inquisitivecrystal:better-errors-for-display-traits-v3, r=estebank

Better errors for Debug and Display traits

Currently, if someone tries to pass value that does not implement `Debug` or `Display` to a formatting macro, they get a very verbose and confusing error message. This PR changes the error messages for missing `Debug` and `Display` impls to be less overwhelming in this case, as suggested by rust-lang#85844. I was a little less aggressive in changing the error message than that issue proposed. Still, this implementation would be enough to reduce the number of messages to be much more manageable.

After this PR, information on the cause of an error involving a `Debug` or `Display` implementation would suppressed if the requirement originated within a standard library macro. My reasoning was that errors originating from within a macro are confusing when they mention details that the programmer can't see, and this is particularly problematic for `Debug` and `Display`, which are most often used via macros. It is possible that either a broader or a narrower criterion would be better. I'm quite open to any feedback.

Fixes rust-lang#85844.

Author: bors

core/src/fmt/mod.rs

@@ -564,7 +564,7 @@ impl Display for Arguments<'_> {
     on(
         crate_local,
         label = "`{Self}` cannot be formatted using `{{:?}}`",
-        note = "add `#[derive(Debug)]` or manually implement `{Debug}`"
+        note = "add `#[derive(Debug)]` to `{Self}` or manually `impl {Debug} for {Self}`"
     ),
     message = "`{Self}` doesn't implement `{Debug}`",
     label = "`{Self}` cannot be formatted using `{{:?}}` because it doesn't implement `{Debug}`"
@@ -662,6 +662,7 @@ pub use macros::Debug;
     note = "in format strings you may be able to use `{{:?}}` (or {{:#?}} for pretty-print) instead"
 )]
 #[doc(alias = "{}")]
+#[rustc_diagnostic_item = "display_trait"]
 #[stable(feature = "rust1", since = "1.0.0")]
 pub trait Display {
     /// Formats the value using the given formatter.