Tests that specialization is working correctly:
-
Dispatch
- On methods, includes:
- Specialization via adding a trait bound
- Including both remote and local traits
- Specialization via pure structure (e.g.
(T, U)vs(T, T)) - Specialization via concrete types vs unknown types
- In top level of the trait reference
- Embedded within another type (
Vec<T>vsVec<i32>)
- Specialization via adding a trait bound
- Specialization based on super trait relationships
- On assoc fns
- Ensure that impl order doesn't matter
- On methods, includes:
-
Item inheritance
- Correct default cascading for methods
- Inheritance works across impls with varying generics
-
Normalization issues
- Non-default assoc types can be projected
- Including non-specialized cases
- Including specialized cases
- Specialized Impls can happen on projections
- Projections and aliases play well together
- Projections involving specialization allowed in the trait ref for impls, and overlap can still be determined
- Only works for the simple case where the most specialized impl directly
provides a non-
defaultassociated type
- Only works for the simple case where the most specialized impl directly
provides a non-
- Non-default assoc types can be projected
-
Across crates
- For traits defined in upstream crate
- Full method dispatch tests, drawing from upstream crate
- Including additional local specializations
- Full method dispatch tests, without turning on specialization in local crate
- Test that defaults cascade correctly from upstream crates
- Including additional local use of defaults