1 files changed, 47 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/src/test/ui/nll/issue-45696-no-variant-box-recur.rs b/src/test/ui/nll/issue-45696-no-variant-box-recur.rs
new file mode 100644
index 000000000..39f1607a3
--- /dev/null
+++ b/src/test/ui/nll/issue-45696-no-variant-box-recur.rs
@@ -0,0 +1,47 @@
+// rust-lang/rust#45696: This test checks the compiler won't infinite loop when
+// you declare a variable of type `struct A(Box<A>, ...);` (which is impossible
+// to construct but *is* possible to declare; see also issues #4287, #44933,
+// and #52852).
+
+// run-pass
+
+// This test has structs and functions that are by definition unusable
+// all over the place, so just go ahead and allow dead_code
+#![allow(dead_code)]
+
+// direct regular recursion with indirect ownership via box
+struct C { field: Box<C> }
+
+// direct non-regular recursion with indirect ownership via box
+struct D { field: Box<(D, D)> }
+
+// indirect regular recursion with indirect ownership via box.
+struct E { field: F }
+struct F { field: Box<E> }
+
+// indirect non-regular recursion with indirect ownership via box.
+struct G { field: (H, H) }
+struct H { field: Box<G> }
+
+// These enums are cases that are not currently hit by the
+// `visit_terminator_drop` recursion down a type's structural
+// definition.
+//
+// But it seems prudent to include them in this test as variants on
+// the above, in that they are similarly non-constructable data types
+// with destructors that would diverge.
+enum I { One(Box<I>) }
+enum J { One(Box<J>), Two(Box<J>) }
+
+fn impossible_to_call_c(_c: C) { }
+fn impossible_to_call_d(_d: D) { }
+fn impossible_to_call_e(_e: E) { }
+fn impossible_to_call_f(_f: F) { }
+fn impossible_to_call_g(_g: G) { }
+fn impossible_to_call_h(_h: H) { }
+fn impossible_to_call_i(_i: I) { }
+fn impossible_to_call_j(_j: J) { }
+
+fn main() {
+
+}