rust/src/test/run-pass/expr-if-unique.rs

#![feature(box_syntax)]

// Tests for if as expressions returning boxed types
fn test_box() {
    let rs: Box<_> = if true { box 100 } else { box 101 };
    assert_eq!(*rs, 100);
}

pub fn main() { test_box(); }
fallout: run-pass tests that use box. (many could be ported to `Box::new` instead in the future.) 2015-01-08 01:25:56 +00:00			`#![feature(box_syntax)]`
Create a bunch of test cases for unique boxes by copying box tests XFAIL the ones that don't work Issue #409 2011-09-23 21:58:06 +00:00
			`// Tests for if as expressions returning boxed types`
			`fn test_box() {`
Add `: Box<_>` or `::Box<_>` type annotations to various places. This is the kind of change that one is expected to need to make to accommodate overloaded-`box`. ---- Note that this is not all of the changes necessary to accommodate Issue 22181. It is merely the subset of those cases where there was already a let-binding in place that made it easy to add the necesasry type ascription. (For unnamed intermediate `Box` values, one must go down a different route; `Box::new` is the option that maximizes portability, but has potential inefficiency depending on whether the call is inlined.) ---- There is one place worth note, `run-pass/coerce-match.rs`, where I used an ugly form of `Box<_>` type ascription where I would have preferred to use `Box::new` to accommodate overloaded-`box`. I deliberately did not use `Box::new` here, because that is already done in coerce-match-calls.rs. ---- Precursor for overloaded-`box` and placement-`in`; see Issue 22181. 2015-02-17 20:41:32 +00:00			`let rs: Box<_> = if true { box 100 } else { box 101 };`
Remove all `i` suffixes 2015-01-25 21:05:03 +00:00			`assert_eq!(*rs, 100);`
Create a bunch of test cases for unique boxes by copying box tests XFAIL the ones that don't work Issue #409 2011-09-23 21:58:06 +00:00			`}`

check-fast fallout from removing export, r=burningtree 2013-02-02 03:43:17 +00:00			`pub fn main() { test_box(); }`