Some eliminators (such as `False.rec`) have an explicit motive argument.
The `elabAsElim` elaborator assumed that all motives are implicit.
If the explicit motive argument is `_`, then it uses the elab-as-elim
procedure, and otherwise it falls back to the standard app elaborator.
Furthermore, if an explicit elaborator is not provided, it falls back to
treating the elaborator as being implicit, which is convenient for
writing `h.rec` rather than `h.rec _`. Rationale: for `False.rec`, this
simulates it having an implicit motive, and also motives are generally
not going to be available in the expected type.
Closes#4347
Many of our tests in `tests/lean/run/` produce output from `#eval` (or
`#check`) statements, that is then ignored.
This PR tries to capture all the useful output using `#guard_msgs`. I've
only done a cursory check that the output is still sane --- there is a
chance that some "unchecked" tests have already accumulated regressions
and this just cements them!
In the other direction, I did identify two rotten tests:
* a minor one in `setStructInstNotation.lean`, where a comment says `Set
Nat`, but `#check` actually prints `?_`. Weird?
* `CompilerProbe.lean` is generating empty output, apparently indicating
that something is broken, but I don't know the signficance of this file.
In any case, I'll ask about these elsewhere.
(This started by noticing that a recent `grind` test file had an
untested `trace_state`, and then got carried away.)
