Auto merge of #13865 - lnicola:nits2, r=Veykril

minor: Tweak Clippy policy wording and drop a useless `format!`
This commit is contained in:
bors 2022-12-30 21:20:43 +00:00
commit 6892b16336
2 changed files with 2 additions and 2 deletions

View File

@ -49,7 +49,7 @@ pub(crate) fn render_tuple_lit(
path: &str, path: &str,
) -> RenderedLiteral { ) -> RenderedLiteral {
if snippet_cap.is_none() { if snippet_cap.is_none() {
return RenderedLiteral { literal: format!("{path}"), detail: format!("{path}") }; return RenderedLiteral { literal: path.to_string(), detail: path.to_string() };
} }
let completions = fields.iter().enumerate().format_with(", ", |(idx, _), f| { let completions = fields.iter().enumerate().format_with(", ", |(idx, _), f| {
if snippet_cap.is_some() { if snippet_cap.is_some() {

View File

@ -101,7 +101,7 @@ Including a description and GIF suitable for the changelog means less work for t
We don't enforce Clippy. We don't enforce Clippy.
A number of default lints have high false positive rate. A number of default lints have high false positive rate.
Selectively patching false-positives with `allow(clippy)` is considered worse than not using Clippy at all. Selectively patching false-positives with `allow(clippy)` is probably worse than entirely disabling a problematic lint.
There's a `cargo lint` command which runs a subset of low-FPR lints. There's a `cargo lint` command which runs a subset of low-FPR lints.
Careful tweaking of `lint` is welcome. Careful tweaking of `lint` is welcome.
Of course, applying Clippy suggestions is welcome as long as they indeed improve the code. Of course, applying Clippy suggestions is welcome as long as they indeed improve the code.