`indexing_slicing` should not fire if a valid array index comes from a constant function that is evaluated at compile-time
fix#8348
changelog: [`indexing_slicing`] fewer false positives in `const` contexts and with `const` indices
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`]
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`
