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.
These aren't in their final form, but are all aiming to be part of 1.0, so at the very least encouraging usage now to find the bugs is nice.
Also, the widespread roll-out of associated types in the standard library indicates they're getting good, and it's lame to have to activate a feature in essentially every crate ever.
