Use fewer instructions for `fail!`

Adds a new runtime unwinding function that encapsulates the printing of the words "explicit failure".

The before/after optimized assembly:

```
        leaq    "str\"str\"(1369)"(%rip), %rax
        movq    %rax, 8(%rsp)
        movq    $19, 16(%rsp)
        leaq    8(%rsp), %rdi
        movl    $11, %esi
        callq   _ZN6unwind31begin_unwind_no_time_to_explain20hd1c720cdde6a116480dE@PLT
```

```
        leaq    "str\"str\"(1412)"(%rip), %rax
        movq    %rax, 24(%rsp)
        movq    $16, 32(%rsp)
        leaq    "str\"str\"(1413)"(%rip), %rax
        movq    %rax, 8(%rsp)
        movq    $19, 16(%rsp)
        leaq    24(%rsp), %rdi
        leaq    8(%rsp), %rsi
        movl    $11, %edx
        callq   _ZN6unwind12begin_unwind21h15836560661922107792E
```

Before/after filesizes:

rwxrwxr-x 1 brian brian 21479503 Jul 20 22:09 stage2-old/lib/librustc-4e7c5e5c.so
rwxrwxr-x 1 brian brian 21475415 Jul 20 22:30 x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/stage2/lib/librustc-4e7c5e5c.so

This is the lowest-hanging fruit in the fail-bloat wars. Further fixes are going to require harder tradeoffs.

r? @pcwalton

There's at least one more very low hanging fruit here