This also does a little restructuring in the same direction, following
#6124.
Leads want `Destroy` to work similarly now for all types. As a
consequence, there doesn't seem to be as much benefit to splitting off
aggregate destruction. In this PR, the `type.destroy` function can now
be expected to destroy anything that's destructible; that means it'll be
usable for the `final fn` once that support is available.
Similarly, this gets rid of the impls other than the single blanket
impl, now using `type.can_destroy`. Since they all need to use the same
function, there's no benefit to splitting approaches. Also, now it can
just be a `final impl` since there should be no need for people to
create specializations -- if this blanket impl applies, it means the
`final fn` is the same.
This also slips in `partial` support since there's no reason to have it
diverge anymore. Also `abstract`, which I'm not sure is broadly testable
since most cases it'd come up, the `abstract` keyword is explicitly
detected/rejected.
Note though that this doesn't make any really big changes. It's just
realigning on the leads decision. I'm going this way to try to reduce
name-related churn for other changes.
Jon Ross-Perkins
4a6376cf59