PR #24242 added the ability to the compiler to directly give suggestions about
how to modify code to fix an error. The new errors look like this:
foobar.rs:5:12: 5:25 error: expected a path on the left-hand side of `+`,
not `&'static Copy` [E0178]
foobar.rs:5 let x: &'static Copy + 'static;
^~~~~~~~~~~~~
foobar.rs:5:12: 5:35 help: try adding parentheses (per RFC 438):
foobar.rs: let x: &'static (Copy + 'static);
foobar.rs:2:13: 2:23 error: cast to unsized type: `&_` as `core::marker::Copy`
foobar.rs:2 let x = &1 as Copy;
^~~~~~~~~~
foobar.rs:2:19: 2:23 help: try casting to a reference instead:
foobar.rs: let x = &1 as &Copy;
foobar.rs:7:24: 7:25 error: expected expression, found `;`
foobar.rs:7 let x = box (1 + 1);
^
foobar.rs:7:13: 7:16 help: try using `box()` instead:
foobar.rs: let x = box() (1 + 1);
This also modifies compiletest to give the ability to directly test suggestions
given by error messages.
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.
