rust/src/test/ui/issues/issue-10767.rs

// run-pass
// pretty-expanded FIXME #23616

#![feature(box_syntax)]

pub fn main() {
    fn f() {
    }
    let _: Box<fn()> = box (f as fn());
}
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`
rustdoc: Replace no-pretty-expanded with pretty-expanded Now that features must be declared expanded source often does not compile. This adds 'pretty-expanded' to a bunch of test cases that still work. 2015-03-22 15:13:15 -05:00			`// pretty-expanded FIXME #23616`

fallout: run-pass tests that use box. (many could be ported to `Box::new` instead in the future.) 2015-01-07 19:25:56 -06:00			`#![feature(box_syntax)]`
librustc: Remove `~EXPR`, `~TYPE`, and `~PAT` from the language, except for `~str`/`~[]`. Note that `~self` still remains, since I forgot to add support for `Box<self>` before the snapshot. How to update your code: * Instead of `~EXPR`, you should write `box EXPR`. * Instead of `~TYPE`, you should write `Box<Type>`. * Instead of `~PATTERN`, you should write `box PATTERN`. [breaking-change] 2014-05-05 20:56:44 -05:00
syntax: Tweak parsing lifetime bounds on closures In summary these are some example transitions this change makes: 'a \|\| => \|\|: 'a proc:Send() => proc():Send The intended syntax for closures is to put the lifetime bound not at the front but rather in the list of bounds. Currently there is no official support in the AST for bounds that are not 'static, so this case is currently specially handled in the parser to desugar to what the AST is expecting. Additionally, this moves the bounds on procedures to the correct position, which is after the argument list. The current grammar for closures and procedures is: procedure := 'proc' [ '<' lifetime-list '>' ] '(' arg-list ')' [ ':' bound-list ] [ '->' type ] closure := [ 'unsafe' ] ['<' lifetime-list '>' ] '\|' arg-list '\|' [ ':' bound-list ] [ '->' type ] lifetime-list := lifetime \| lifetime ',' lifetime-list arg-list := ident ':' type \| ident ':' type ',' arg-list bound-list := bound \| bound '+' bound-list bound := path \| lifetime This does not currently handle the << ambiguity in `Option<<'a>\|\|>`, I am deferring that to a later patch. Additionally, this removes the support for the obsolete syntaxes of ~fn and &fn. Closes #10553 Closes #10767 Closes #11209 Closes #11210 Closes #11211 2014-04-02 11:47:11 -05:00			`pub fn main() {`
			`fn f() {`
Fix new 'unnecessary trailing semicolon' warnings 2020-11-25 16:00:28 -06:00			`}`
Remove the deprecated box(PLACE) syntax. 2015-09-24 10:00:08 -05:00			`let _: Box<fn()> = box (f as fn());`
syntax: Tweak parsing lifetime bounds on closures In summary these are some example transitions this change makes: 'a \|\| => \|\|: 'a proc:Send() => proc():Send The intended syntax for closures is to put the lifetime bound not at the front but rather in the list of bounds. Currently there is no official support in the AST for bounds that are not 'static, so this case is currently specially handled in the parser to desugar to what the AST is expecting. Additionally, this moves the bounds on procedures to the correct position, which is after the argument list. The current grammar for closures and procedures is: procedure := 'proc' [ '<' lifetime-list '>' ] '(' arg-list ')' [ ':' bound-list ] [ '->' type ] closure := [ 'unsafe' ] ['<' lifetime-list '>' ] '\|' arg-list '\|' [ ':' bound-list ] [ '->' type ] lifetime-list := lifetime \| lifetime ',' lifetime-list arg-list := ident ':' type \| ident ':' type ',' arg-list bound-list := bound \| bound '+' bound-list bound := path \| lifetime This does not currently handle the << ambiguity in `Option<<'a>\|\|>`, I am deferring that to a later patch. Additionally, this removes the support for the obsolete syntaxes of ~fn and &fn. Closes #10553 Closes #10767 Closes #11209 Closes #11210 Closes #11211 2014-04-02 11:47:11 -05:00			`}`