Add config flag for reborrows in explicit_iter_loop
This PR adds a config flag for enforcing explicit into iter lint for reborrowed values. The config flag, `enforce_iter_loop_reborrow`, can be added to clippy.toml files to enable the linting behaviour. By default the reborrow lint is disabled.
fixes: #11074
changelog: [`explicit_iter_loop`]: add config flag `enforce_iter_loop_reborrow` to disable reborrow linting by default
new lint: `iter_out_of_bounds`
Closes#11345
The original idea in the linked issue seemed to be just about arrays afaict, but I extended this to catch some other iterator sources such as `iter::once` or `iter::empty`.
I'm not entirely sure if this name makes a lot of sense now that it's not just about arrays anymore (specifically, not sure if you can call `.take(1)` on an `iter::Empty` to be "out of bounds"?).
changelog: [`iter_out_of_bounds`]: new lint
New lint `ignored_unit_patterns`
This idea comes from #11238. I've put the lint in `pedantic` as it might trigger numerous positives (three in Clippy itself).
changelog: [`ignored_unit_patterns`]: new lint
New lint [`needless_return_with_try`]
Closes#10902
Rather than having a config option, this will just suggest removing the "return"; if `try_err` is used as well, then it'll be added again but without the `?`.
changelog: New lint [`needless_return_with_try`]
`unwrap_or_else_default` -> `unwrap_or_default` and improve resulting lint
Resolves#10080 (though it doesn't implement exactly what's described there)
This PR does the following:
1. Merges `unwrap_or_else_default.rs`'s code into `or_fun_call.rs`
2. Extracts the code to handle `unwrap_or(/* default value */)` and similar, and moves it into `unwrap_or_else_default`
3. Implements the missing functionality from #9342, e.g.,, to handle `or_insert_with(Default::default)`
4. Renames `unwrap_or_else_default` to `unwrap_or_default` (since the "new" lint handles both `unwrap_or` and `unwrap_or_else`, it seemed sensible to use the shortened name)
This PR is currently two commits. The first implements 1-3, the second implements 4.
A word about 2: the `or_fun_call` lint currently produces warnings like the following:
```
error: use of `unwrap_or` followed by a call to `new`
--> $DIR/or_fun_call.rs:56:14
|
LL | with_new.unwrap_or(Vec::new());
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ help: try: `unwrap_or_default()`
```
To me, such warnings look like they should come from `unwrap_or_else_default`, not `or_fun_call`, especially since `or_fun_call` is [in the nursery](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust-clippy/pull/9829).
---
changelog: Move: Renamed `unwrap_or_else_default` to [`unwrap_or_default`]
[#10120](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust-clippy/pull/10120)
changelog: Enhancement: [`unwrap_or_default`]: Now handles more functions, like `or_insert_with`
[#10120](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust-clippy/pull/10120)
<!-- changelog_checked-->
fix dogfood lints in `redundant_local`
keep `redundant_local` from running in proc macros
rewrite `redundant_local` as late pass
make redundant_local's `find_binding` more readable
pluralize `redundant_locals` name
add test for `redundant_locals` in macros
test `redundant_locals` in proc macros
use more destructuring in `redundant_locals`
fix: format redundant_locals.rs
ignore needless_pass_by_mut_ref in redundant_locals test
Add `needless_pass_by_ref_mut` lint
changelog: [`needless_pass_by_ref_mut`]: This PR add a new lint `needless_pass_by_ref_mut` which emits a warning in case a `&mut` function argument isn't used mutably. It doesn't warn on trait and trait impls functions.
Fixes#8863.
cargo dev fmt
cargo test passes
cargo test passes
refactor a lil
Update bool_comparison.stderr
heavily refactor + bump `clippy::version`
refactor
refactor
check bounds to increase accuracy, and add todos
new lint: `type_id_on_box`
Closes#7687.
A new lint that detects calling `.type_id()` on `Box<dyn Any>` (and not on the underlying `dyn Any`), which can make up for some pretty confusing bugs!
changelog: new lint: [`type_id_on_box`]
New lint [`tuple_array_conversions`]
Closes#10748
PS, the implementation is a bit ugly 😅 ~~I will likely refactor soon enough :)~~ Done :D
changelog: New lint [`tuple_array_conversions`]
New lint [`redundant_at_rest_pattern`]
Closes#11011
It's always a great feeling when a new lint triggers on clippy itself 😄
changelog: New lint [`redundant_at_rest_pattern`]
new lint [`single_range_in_vec_init`]
Lints on `vec![0..200]` (or `[0..200]`), suggesting either `(0..200).collect::<Vec<i32>>()` or `[0; 200]`.
Haven't tested it with anything that isn't primitive. Probably should!
Closes#10932
changelog: new lint [`single_range_in_vec_init`]
Add lints for disallowing usage of `to_xx_bytes` and `from_xx_bytes`
Adds `host_endian_bytes`, `little_endian_bytes` and `big_endian_bytes`
Closes#10765
v - not sure what to put here since this adds 3 lints
changelog: Add `host_endian_bytes`, `little_endian_bytes` and `big_endian_bytes` lints
Update *Current stable* text in `CHANGELOG.md`
Roses are red,
violets are blue,
the new version was released,
and our changelog too
---
changelog: none
move some strings into consts, more tests
s/missing_field_in_debug/missing_fields_in_debug
dont trigger in macro expansions
make dogfood tests happy
minor cleanups
replace HashSet with FxHashSet
replace match_def_path with match_type
if_chain -> let chains, fix markdown, allow newtype pattern
fmt
consider string literal in `.field()` calls as used
don't intern defined symbol, remove mentions of 'debug_tuple'
special-case PD, account for field access through `Deref`
Add new lint `ptr_cast_constness`
This adds a new lint which functions as the opposite side of the coin to `ptr_as_ptr`. Rather than linting only as casts that don't change constness, this lints only constness; suggesting to use `pointer::cast_const` or `pointer::cast_mut` instead.
changelog: new lint [`ptr_cast_constness`]
fix: warn on empty line outer AttrKind::DocComment
changelog: [`empty_line_after_doc_comments`]: add lint for checking empty lines after rustdoc comments.
Fixes: #10395
Fixes#10609: Adds lint to detect construction of unit struct using `default`
Using `default` to construct a unit struct increases code complexity and adds a function call. This can be avoided by simply removing the call to `default` and simply construct by name.
changelog: [`default_constructed_unit_structs`]: detects construction of unit structs using `default`
fixes#10609
Using `default` to construct a unit struct increases code complexity and
adds a function call. This can be avoided by simply removing the call to
`default` and simply construct by name.
New lint: detect `if` expressions with simple boolean assignments to the same target
Closes#10430
changelog: [`needless_bool_assign`] new lint to detect simple boolean assignment to the same target in `if` branches
Added the `[unnecessary_box_returns]` lint
fixes#5
I'm not confident in the name of this lint. Let me know if you can think of something better
---
changelog: New lint: ``[`unnecessary_box_returns`]``
[#9102](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust-clippy/pull/9102)
<!-- changelog_checked -->
Add `collection_is_never_read`
Fixes#9267
`@flip1995` and `@llogiq,` I talked with you about this one at Rust Nation in London last week. :-)
This is my first contribution to Clippy, so lots of feedback would be greatly appreciated.
- \[ ] Followed [lint naming conventions][lint_naming]
- \[x] Added passing UI tests (including committed `.stderr` file)
- \[x] `cargo test` passes locally
- \[x] Executed `cargo dev update_lints`
- \[x] Added lint documentation
- \[x] Run `cargo dev fmt`
`dogfood` found one true positive (see #9509) and no false positives.
`lintcheck` found no (true or false) positives, even when running on an extended set of crates.
---
changelog: new lint [`collection_is_never_read`]
[#10415](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust-clippy/pull/10415)
<!-- changelog_checked -->
Add `impl_trait_in_params` lint
As this is a lint about style, and using `impl Trait` is purely cosmetical (even with downsides), a lot of unrelated files needed to allow this lint.
---
Resolves#10030
changelog: New lint: [`impl_trait_in_params`]
[10197](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust-clippy/pull/10197)
<!-- changelog_checked -->
Add question-mark-used lint
This lint complains when the question mark operator (try operator) is used. This is a restriction lint that can be useful on local scopes where a custom error handling macro is supposed to be used to augment the error based on local scope data before returning.
Fixes#10340
---
changelog: New lint [`question_mark_used`]
[#10342](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust-clippy/pull/10342)
<!-- changelog_checked -->
Add `let_underscore_untyped`
Fixes#6842
This adds a new pedantic `let_underscore_untyped` lint which checks for `let _ = <expr>`, and suggests to either provide a type annotation, or to remove the `let` keyword. That way the author is forced to specify the type they intended to ignore, and thus get forced to re-visit the decision should the type of `<expr>` change. Alternatively, they can drop the `let` keyword to truly just ignore the value no matter what.
r? `@llogiq`
changelog: New lint: [let_underscore_untyped]
[significant_drop_tightening] Add MVP
cc #9399
Creates the lint with minimum functionalities, which is a good start IMO.
---
changelog: new lint: [`significant_drop_tightening`]
[#10163](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust-clippy/pull/10163)
<!-- changelog_checked -->
As this is a lint about "style", and a purely cosmetical choice (using `<A: Trait>` over `impl Trait`), a lot of other files needed to be allowed this lint.
This lint complains when the question mark operator (try operator)
is used. This is a restriction lint that can be useful on local
scopes where a custom error handling macro is supposed to be used
to augment the error based on local scope data before returning.
Add size_of_ref lint
This addresses #9995, which is likely raising a valid point about `std::mem::size_of_val()`: It's [very easy to use double-references as the argument](https://github.com/apache/arrow-datafusion/pull/4371#discussion_r1032385224), which the function will happily accept and give back the size of _the reference_, not the size of the value _behind_ the reference. In the worst case, if the value matches the programmer's expectation, this seems to work, while in fact, everything will go horribly wrong e.g. on a different platform.
The size of a `&T` is independent of what `T` is, and people might want to use `std::mem::size_of_val()` to actually get the size of _any_ reference (e.g. via `&&()`). I would rather suggest that this is always bad behavior, though ([instead](https://doc.rust-lang.org/reference/type-layout.html#pointers-and-references-layout), [and](https://doc.rust-lang.org/stable/std/primitive.usize.html#associatedconstant.BITS)). I, therefore, put this lint into `correctness`.
Since the problem is usually easily fixed by removing extra `&`, I went light on suggesting code.
---
changelog: New lint: [`size_of_ref`]
[#10098](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust-clippy/pull/10098)
<!-- changelog_checked -->
Changelog 1.66
It's really nice to see a changelog with so many suggestion fixes and improvements. Not much else to say. This should be merged with the coming release on 2022-12-15. For the reviewer, please review it and approve it if it looks good. The merge should wait until the release :)
---
changelog: none
<!-- changelog_checked -->
feat: lint unchecked subtraction of a 'Duration' from an 'Instant'
Hello all, I tried to tackle the open issue #9371 and this is what I came up with.
I have a difficulty currently - some tests are failing:
```
failures:
[ui] ui/manual_instant_elapsed.rs
```
The `manual_instant_elapsed` is failing because of `Instant::now() - duration` test, this now gets also picked by `unchecked_duration_subtraction` lint.
What is the correct way to proceed in this case? Simply update the `.stderr` file for `manual_instant_elapsed` lint?
changelog: [`unchecked_duration_subtraction`]: Add lint for unchecked subtraction of a `Duration` from an `Instant`.
fixes#9371
Add `manual_is_ascii_check` lint
Addresses https://github.com/rust-lang/rust-clippy/issues/9290
This PR adds new lint `manual_is_ascii_check`, which detects comparison with ascii ranges using `matches!` macros.
As I mentioned as following in the Issue;
> Yes, that's true. we'll start small and then grow it.
> So I'll try to handle matches! macro with single range as suggested above.
However during writing first version, I was thinking that the changes to support alphabetic and digits will be small patch, so I made a single PR in hope review cost can be reduced.
changelog: add new lint [`manual_is_ascii_check`]
r? `@xFrednet`
Changelog for Rust 1.65
Roses are red,
violets are blue,
another 6 weeks,
another changelog, yahoo!
This did not rhyme,
luckily, not a crime.
I want to say something smart,
but I am out of time.
---
Note for the reviewer. This PR is written, as if Rust was already released on 2022-11-03. Please review the changes and approve if you agree, but only merge it after the release. :)
---
changelog: none
