Rework `undocumented_unsafe_blocks`
fixes: #8264fixes: #8449
One thing came up while working on this. Currently comments on the same line are supported like so:
```rust
/* SAFETY: reason */ unsafe {}
```
Is this worth supporting at all? Anything other than a couple of words doesn't really fit well.
edit: [zulip topic](https://rust-lang.zulipchat.com/#narrow/stream/257328-clippy/topic/.60undocumented_unsafe_blocks.60.20same.20line.20comment)
changelog: Don't lint `undocumented_unsafe_blocks` when the unsafe block comes from a proc-macro.
changelog: Don't lint `undocumented_unsafe_blocks` when the preceding line has a safety comment and the unsafe block is a sub-expression.
add `empty_structs_with_brackets`
<!-- Thank you for making Clippy better!
We're collecting our changelog from pull request descriptions.
If your PR only includes internal changes, you can just write
`changelog: none`. Otherwise, please write a short comment
explaining your change. Also, it's helpful for us that
the lint name is put into brackets `[]` and backticks `` ` ` ``,
e.g. ``[`lint_name`]``.
If your PR fixes an issue, you can add "fixes #issue_number" into this
PR description. This way the issue will be automatically closed when
your PR is merged.
If you added a new lint, here's a checklist for things that will be
checked during review or continuous integration.
- \[ ] Followed [lint naming conventions][lint_naming]
- \[ ] Added passing UI tests (including committed `.stderr` file)
- \[ ] `cargo test` passes locally
- \[ ] Executed `cargo dev update_lints`
- \[ ] Added lint documentation
- \[ ] Run `cargo dev fmt`
[lint_naming]: https://rust-lang.github.io/rfcs/0344-conventions-galore.html#lints
Note that you can skip the above if you are just opening a WIP PR in
order to get feedback.
Delete this line and everything above before opening your PR.
--
*Please write a short comment explaining your change (or "none" for internal only changes)*
-->
Closes#8591
I'm already sorry for the massive diff 😅
changelog: New lint [`empty_structs_with_brackets`]
Remove deps
This remove both `regex` and `cargo_metadata` as dependencies making `clippy_dev` compile ~3x faster (~46s -> ~16s locally). `cargo_metadata` was used to extract the `version` field from `Cargo.toml`, which is done trivially without that. `regex` was used to parse `define_clippy_lint` in `update_lints` which is now done using `rustc_lexer`. This isn't any simpler, but it compiles ~15s faster and runs ~3x faster (~2.1s -> ~0.7s locally).
The next biggest offenders to compile times are `clap` and `winapi` on windows. `clap` could be removed, but re-implementing enough is probably more work than it's worth. `winapi` is used by `opener` and `walkdir` so it's stuck there.
changelog: none
Handle relative paths in module_files lints
The problem being that when clippy is run in the project's directory `lp` would be a relative path, this wasn't caught by the tests as there `lp` is an absolute path. Being a relative path it did not start with `trim_src_path` and so was ignored
Also allowed the removal of some `.to_os_string`/`.to_owned`s
changelog: Fixes [`self_named_module_files`] and [`mod_module_files`] not linting
Fixes#8123, cc `@DevinR528`
single_element_loop: handle arrays for Edition2021
changelog: [`single_element_loop`] handle arrays in Edition 2021, handle `.iter_mut()` and `.into_iter()`, and wrap in parens if necessary
Add `crate_in_macro_def` lint
This PR adds a lint to check for `crate` as opposed to `$crate` used in a macro definition.
I think this can close#4798. That issue focused on the case where the macro author "imports something into said macro."
But I think use of `crate` is likely to be a bug whether it appears in a `use` statement or not. There could be some use case I am failing to see, though. (cc: `@nilscript` `@flip1995)`
changelog: `crate_in_macro_def`
Changelog for Rust 1.60.0 🦀 (Kudos to everyone who contributed!)
As always, I'm impressed by how much stuff happened in just one release. Seriously, kudos to everyone who contributed.
changelog: none
