Adding configuration to allow safety comment above stmt containing unsafe block
Adding a new configuration, `accept-comment-above-statement`, to allow a safety comment to be placed before the statement that has the `unsafe` block. It affects the `undocumented_unsafe_blocks` lint.
The default value for this configuration will be `false`. So the user has to opt-in for the change.
This PR fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust-clippy/issues/10832
---
changelog: Enhancement [`undocumented_unsafe_blocks`]: Added `accept-comment-above-statement` configuration.
[#10886](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust-clippy/pull/10886)
Adapt versions.html file to cleaned up gh-pages
Companion PR to #10875
changelog: Remove legacy v0.0.* versions from Clippy repository and documentation.
Must be merged together with #10875 (best with a closed tree)
r? `@Alexendoo` (because you were randomly selected on the other PR :P)
Ignore more type aliases in `unnecessary_cast`
This is potentially the worst code I've ever written, and even if not, it's very close to being on par with starb. This will ignore `call() as i32` and `local_obtained_from_call as i32` now.
This should fix every reasonable way to reproduce #10555, but likely not entirely.
changelog: Ignore more type aliases in `unnecessary_cast`
[`missing_panics_doc`]: pickup expect method
close#10240
*Please write a short comment explaining your change (or "none" for internal only changes)*
changelog: [`missing_panics_doc`]: pickup expect method
new lint: `drain_collect`
Closes#10818.
This adds a new lint that looks for `.drain(..).collect()` and suggests replacing it with `mem::take`.
changelog: [`drain_collect`]: new lint
[`match_same_arms`]: don't lint if `non_exhaustive_omitted_patterns`
Fixes#10327
changelog: [`match_same_arms`]: Don't lint if `non_exhaustive_omitted_patterns` is `warn` or `deny`
from_over_into: Show suggestions for non-Self expanded paths
changelog: [`from_over_into`]: Show suggestions when the body contains macros not expanding to `Self`
Currently any path in a macro expansion causes the suggestion to be hidden, meaning most macro calls cause it to be hidden
Now it's only hidden if the expansion contains `Self`
[`unnecessary_fold`]: suggest turbofish if necessary
Fixes#10000
This adds turbofish `::<T>` to the suggestion in `unnecessary_fold`. This is necessary because the `Sum` trait is generic, which breaks inference when changing `fold()` to `sum()`.
changelog: [`unnecessary_fold`]: suggest turbofish if necessary
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`]
[`derivable_impls`]: don't lint if `default()` call expr unsize-coerces to trait object
Fixes#10158.
This fixes a FP where the derive-generated Default impl would have different behavior because of unsize coercion from `Box<T>` to `Box<dyn Trait>`:
```rs
struct S {
x: Box<dyn std::fmt::Debug>
}
impl Default for S {
fn default() -> Self {
Self {
x: Box::<()>::default()
// ^~ Box<()> coerces to Box<dyn Debug>
// #[derive(Default)] would call Box::<dyn Debug>::default()
}
}
}
```
(this intentionally only looks for trait objects `dyn` specifically, and not any unsize coercion, e.g. `&[i32; 5]` to `&[i32]`, because that breaks existing tests and isn't actually problematic, as far as I can tell)
changelog: [`derivable_impls`]: don't lint if `default()` call expression unsize-coerces to trait object
[`needless_doctest_main`]: ignore `main()` in `no_test` code fences
close#10491
*Please write a short comment explaining your change (or "none" for internal only changes)*
changelog: [`needless_doctest_main`]: ignore `main()` in `no_test` code fence
[`map_unwrap_or`]: don't lint when referenced variable is moved
Fixes#10579.
The previous way of checking if changing `map(f).unwrap_or(a)` to `map_or(a, f)` is safe had a flaw when the argument to `unwrap_or` moves a binding and the `map` closure references that binding in some way.
It used to simply check if any of the identifiers in the `unwrap_or` argument are referenced in the `map` closure, but it didn't consider the case where the moved binding is referred to through references, for example:
```rs
let x = vec![1, 2];
let x_ref = &x;
Some(()).map(|_| x_ref.clone()).unwrap_or(x);
```
This compiles as is, but we cannot change it to `map_or`. This lint however did suggest changing it, because the simple way of checking if `x` is referenced anywhere in the `map` closure fails here. The safest thing to do here imo (what this PR does) is check if the moved value `x` is referenced *anywhere* in the body (before the `unwrap_or` call). One can always create a reference to the value and smuggle them into the closure, without actually referring to `x`. The original, linked issue shows another one such example:
```rs
let x = vec![1,2,3,0];
let y = x.strip_suffix(&[0]).map(|s| s.to_vec()).unwrap_or(x);
```
`x.strip_suffix(&[0])` creates a reference to `x` that is available through `s` inside of the `map` closure, so we can't change it to `map_or`.
changelog: [`map_unwrap_or`]: don't lint when referenced variable is moved
[`no_effect`]: Suggest adding `return` if applicable
Closes#10941
Unfortunately doesn't catch anything complex as `no_effect` already wouldn't, but I'm fine with that (it catches `ControlFlow` at least :D)
changelog: [`no_effect`]: Suggest adding `return` if statement has same type as function's return type and is the last statement in a block
