rust/src/test/run-pass/issues/issue-12744.rs

// run-pass
fn main() {
    fn test() -> Box<std::any::Any + 'static> { Box::new(1) }
    println!("{:?}", test())
}
Add `// run-pass` annotations to all the tests under `ui/run-pass/`. (I may have accidentally added it to some auxilliary crates as well; my emacs-macro-based methodology was pretty crude.) 2018-08-30 07:18:55 -05:00			`// run-pass`
Add tests for E-needstest issues 2014-12-07 09:22:06 -06:00			`fn main() {`
Switched to Box::new in many places. Many of the modifications putting in `Box::new` calls also include a pointer to Issue 22405, which tracks going back to `box <expr>` if possible in the future. (Still tried to use `Box<_>` where it sufficed; thus some tests still have `box_syntax` enabled, as they use a mix of `box` and `Box::new`.) Precursor for overloaded-`box` and placement-`in`; see Issue 22181. 2015-02-15 02:52:21 -06:00			`fn test() -> Box<std::any::Any + 'static> { Box::new(1) }`
core: split into fmt::Show and fmt::String fmt::Show is for debugging, and can and should be implemented for all public types. This trait is used with `{:?}` syntax. There still exists #[derive(Show)]. fmt::String is for types that faithfully be represented as a String. Because of this, there is no way to derive fmt::String, all implementations must be purposeful. It is used by the default format syntax, `{}`. This will break most instances of `{}`, since that now requires the type to impl fmt::String. In most cases, replacing `{}` with `{:?}` is the correct fix. Types that were being printed specifically for users should receive a fmt::String implementation to fix this. Part of #20013 [breaking-change] 2014-12-20 02:09:35 -06:00			`println!("{:?}", test())`
Add tests for E-needstest issues 2014-12-07 09:22:06 -06:00			`}`