Incorrect suggestion made by question_mark when match ergonomics involved

[Plecra]

Summary

Possibly related to #11764

Reproducer

I tried this code:

fn foo() -> Option<()> {
let alias = Some(String::new());
let Some(v) = &alias else { return None };
let _ = v;
Some(())
}

I expected to see this happen:

A valid suggestion would be produced. This is non-trivial, since clippy wants to remove the match. as_ref() works for Options, but not in the general case

Instead, this happened:

warning: this `let...else` may be rewritten with the `?` operator
 --> src/main.rs:4:1
  |
4 | let Some(v) = &alias else { return None };
  | ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ help: replace it with: `let v = &alias?;`
  |
  = help: for further information visit https://rust-lang.github.io/rust-clippy/master/index.html#question_mark
  = note: `#[warn(clippy::question_mark)]` on by default

warning: `playground` (bin "playground") generated 1 warning

note: The suggestion doesn't compile as it has different semantics, and applies the Try operator before taking the reference.

Version

On the playground, which indicates version 0.1.74 (2023-12-04 a28077b)

Additional Labels

No response

[cvijdea-bd]

Might be related to #12412 (or even a duplicate)

[J-ZhengLi]

Yet another reproducer that actually fail to compile (might be different from what @Plecra described, as reason of this failure was because &Option doesn't impl Try):

fn foo(alias: &Option<String>) -> Option<()> {
    let Some(v) = &alias else { return None };
    // let v = &alias?;
    Some(())
}