Fix error warning span for issue12045
fixes [Issue#12045](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust-clippy/issues/12045)
In issue#12045, unexpected warning span occurs on attribute `#[derive(typed_builder::TypedBuilder)]`, actually the warning should underline `_lifetime`.
In the source code we can find that the original intend is to warning on `ident.span`, but in this case, `stmt.span` is unequal with `ident.span`. So, fix the nit here is fine.
Besides, `ident.span` have an accurate range than `stmt.span`.
changelog: [`no_effect_underscore_binding`]: correct warning span
fix FP on [`semicolon_if_nothing_returned`]
fixes: #12123
---
changelog: fix FP on [`semicolon_if_nothing_returned`] which suggesting adding semicolon after attr macro
Fix [`multiple_crate_versions`] to correctly normalize package names to avoid missing the local one
Fixes#12145
changelog: [`multiple_crate_versions`]: correctly normalize package name
Correctly handle type relative in trait_duplication_in_bounds lint
Fixes#9961.
The generic bounds were not correctly checked and left out `QPath::TypeRelative`, making different bounds look the same and generating invalid errors (and fix).
r? `@blyxyas`
changelog: [`trait_duplication_in_bounds`]: Correctly handle type relative.
`read_zero_byte_vec` refactor for better heuristics
Fixes#9274
Previously, the implementation of `read_zero_byte_vec` only checks for the next statement after the vec init. This fails when there is a block with statements that are expanded and walked by the old visitor.
This PR refactors so that:
1. It checks if there is a `resize` on the vec
2. It works on blocks properly
e.g. This should properly lint now:
```
let mut v = Vec::new();
{
f.read(&mut v)?;
//~^ ERROR: reading zero byte data to `Vec`
}
```
changelog: [`read_zero_byte_vec`] Refactored for better heuristics
Add suspicious_open_options lint.
changelog: [`suspicious_open_options`]: Checks for the suspicious use of std::fs::OpenOptions::create() without an explicit OpenOptions::truncate().
create() alone will either create a new file or open an existing file. If the file already exists, it will be overwritten when written to, but the file will not be truncated by default. If less data is written to the file than it already contains, the remainder of the file will remain unchanged, and the end of the file will contain old data.
In most cases, one should either use `create_new` to ensure the file is created from scratch, or ensure `truncate` is called so that the truncation behaviour is explicit. `truncate(true)` will ensure the file is entirely overwritten with new data, whereas `truncate(false)` will explicitely keep the default behavior.
```rust
use std::fs::OpenOptions;
OpenOptions::new().create(true).truncate(true);
```
- [x] 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`
Correctly suggest std or core path depending if this is a `no_std` crate
A few lints emit suggestions using `std` paths whether or not this is a `no_std` crate, which is an issue when running `rustfix` afterwards. So in case this is an item that is defined in both `std` and `core`, we need to check if the crate is `no_std` to emit the right path.
r? `@llogiq`
changelog: Correctly suggest std or core path depending if this is a `no_std` crate
- New ineffective_open_options had to be fixed.
- Now not raising an issue on missing `truncate` when `append(true)`
makes the intent clear.
- Try implementing more advanced tests for non-chained operations. Fail
Checks for the suspicious use of OpenOptions::create()
without an explicit OpenOptions::truncate().
create() alone will either create a new file or open an
existing file. If the file already exists, it will be
overwritten when written to, but the file will not be
truncated by default. If less data is written to the file
than it already contains, the remainder of the file will
remain unchanged, and the end of the file will contain old
data.
In most cases, one should either use `create_new` to ensure
the file is created from scratch, or ensure `truncate` is
called so that the truncation behaviour is explicit.
`truncate(true)` will ensure the file is entirely overwritten
with new data, whereas `truncate(false)` will explicitely
keep the default behavior.
```rust
use std::fs::OpenOptions;
OpenOptions::new().create(true).truncate(true);
```
The OpenTelemetry project's name is all one word (see https://opentelemetry.io),
so currently triggers a false positive in the `doc_markdown` lint.
The project is increasing rapidly in popularity, so it seems like a worthy
contender for inclusion in the default `doc_valid_idents` configuration.
I've also moved the existing "OpenDNS" entry earlier in the list, to restore
the alphabetical ordering of that "Open*" row.
The docs changes were generated using `cargo collect-metadata`.
changelog: [`doc_markdown`]: Add `OpenTelemetry` to the default configuration as an allowed identifier
[`useless_asref`]: check that the clone receiver is the parameter
Fixes#12135
There was no check for the receiver of the `clone` call in the map closure. This makes sure that it's a path to the parameter.
changelog: [`useless_asref`]: check that the clone receiver is the closure parameter
Make `HirEqInterExpr::eq_block` take comments into account while checking if two blocks are equal
This PR:
- now makes `HirEqInterExpr::eq_block` take comments into account. Identical code with varying comments will no longer be considered equal.
- makes necessary adjustments to UI tests.
Closes#12044
**Lintcheck Changes**
- `match_same_arms` 53 => 52
- `if_same_then_else` 3 => 0
changelog: [`if_same_then_else`]: Blocks with different comments will no longer trigger this lint.
changelog: [`match_same_arms`]: Arms with different comments will no longer trigger this lint.
```
Fix false positive in `PartialEq` check in `unconditional_recursion` lint
Fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust-clippy/issues/12133.
We needed to check for the type of the previous element <del>in case it's a field</del>.
EDIT: After some extra thoughts, no need to check if it's a field, just if it's the same type as `Self`.
r? `@llogiq`
changelog: Fix false positive in `PartialEq` check in `unconditional_recursion` lint
Fix suggestion for `map_clone` lint on types implementing `Copy`
Follow-up of https://github.com/rust-lang/rust-clippy/pull/12104.
It was missing this check to suggest the correct method.
r? `@llogiq`
changelog: Fix suggestion for `map_clone` lint on types implementing `Copy`
fix/issue#11243: allow 3-digit-grouped binary in non_octal_unix_permissions
fixes [Issue#11243](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust-clippy/issues/11243)
Issue#11243 suggest lint `non_octal_unix_permissions` should not report binary format literal unix permissions as an error, and we think binary format is a good way to understand these permissions.
To solve this problem, we need to add check for binary literal, which is written in function `check_binary_unix_permissions` , only `binary, 3 groups and each group length equals to 3` is a legal format.
changelog: [`non_octal_unix_permissions`]: Add check for binary format literal unix permissions like 0b111_111_111
Fixed ICE introduced in #12004
Issue: in https://github.com/rust-lang/rust-clippy/pull/12004, we emit a lint for `filter(Option::is_some)`. If the
parent expression is a `.map` we don't emit that lint as there exists a
more specialized lint for that.
The ICE introduced in https://github.com/rust-lang/rust-clippy/pull/12004 is a consequence of the assumption that a
parent expression after a filter would be a method call with the filter
call being the receiver. However, it is entirely possible to have a
closure of the form
```
|| { vec![Some(1), None].into_iter().filter(Option::is_some) }
```
The previous implementation looked at the parent expression; namely the
closure, and tried to check the parameters by indexing [0] on an empty
list.
This commit is an overhaul of the lint with significantly more FP tests
and checks.
Impl details:
1. We verify that the filter method we are in is a proper trait method
to avoid FPs.
2. We check that the parent expression is not a map by checking whether
it exists; if is a trait method; and then a method call.
3. We check that we don't have comments in the span.
4. We verify that we are in an Iterator of Option and Result.
5. We check the contents of the filter.
1. For closures we peel it. If it is not a single expression, we don't
lint. We then try again by checking the peeled expression.
2. For paths, we do a typecheck to avoid FPs for types that impl
functions with the same names.
3. For calls, we verify the type, via the path, and that the param of
the closure is the single argument to the call.
4. For method calls we verify that the receiver is the parameter of
the closure. Since we handle single, non-block exprs, the
parameter can't be shadowed, so no FP.
This commit also adds additional FP tests.
Fixes: #12058
Adding `@xFrednet` as you've the most context for this as you reviewed it last time.
`@rustbot` r? `@xFrednet`
---
changelog: none
(Will be backported and therefore don't effect stable)
Issue: in #12004, we emit a lint for `filter(Option::is_some)`. If the
parent expression is a `.map` we don't emit that lint as there exists a
more specialized lint for that.
The ICE introduced in #12004 is a consequence of the assumption that a
parent expression after a filter would be a method call with the filter
call being the receiver. However, it is entirely possible to have a
closure of the form
```
|| { vec![Some(1), None].into_iter().filter(Option::is_some) }
```
The previous implementation looked at the parent expression; namely the
closure, and tried to check the parameters by indexing [0] on an empty
list.
This commit is an overhaul of the lint with significantly more FP tests
and checks.
Impl details:
1. We verify that the filter method we are in is a proper trait method
to avoid FPs.
2. We check that the parent expression is not a map by checking whether
it exists; if is a trait method; and then a method call.
3. We check that we don't have comments in the span.
4. We verify that we are in an Iterator of Option and Result.
5. We check the contents of the filter.
1. For closures we peel it. If it is not a single expression, we don't
lint.
2. For paths, we do a typecheck to avoid FPs for types that impl
functions with the same names.
3. For calls, we verify the type, via the path, and that the param of
the closure is the single argument to the call.
4. For method calls we verify that the receiver is the parameter of
the closure. Since we handle single, non-block exprs, the
parameter can't be shadowed, so no FP.
This commit also adds additional FP tests.
Handle "calls" inside the closure as well in `map_clone` lint
Follow-up of https://github.com/rust-lang/rust-clippy/pull/12104.
I just realized that I didn't handle the case where the `clone` method was made as a call and not a method call.
r? `@llogiq`
changelog: Handle "calls" inside the closure as well in `map_clone` lint
improve [`cast_sign_loss`], to skip warning on always positive expressions
fixes: #11642
changelog: improve [`cast_sign_loss`] to skip warning on always positive expressions
Turns out this is change became quite big, and I still can't cover all the cases, like method calls such as `POSITIVE_NUM.mul(POSITIVE_NUM)`, or `NEGATIVE_NUM.div(NEGATIVE_NUM)`... but well, if I do, I'm scared that this will goes forever, so I stopped, unless it needs to be done, lol.
Do not suggest `[T; n]` instead of `vec![T; n]` if `T` is not `Copy`
changelog: [`useless_vec`]: do not suggest replacing `&vec![T; N]` by `&[T; N]` if `T` is not `Copy`
Fix#11958
Extend `map_clone` lint to also work on non-explicit closures
I found it weird that this case was not handled by the current line so I added it. The only thing is that I don't see an obvious way to infer the current type to determine if it's copyable or not, so for now I always suggest `cloned` and I added a FIXME.
r? `@llogiq`
changelog: Extend `map_clone` lint to also work on non-explicit closures
don't change eagerness for struct literal syntax with significant drop
Fixes the bug reported by `@ju1ius` in https://github.com/rust-lang/rust-clippy/issues/9427#issuecomment-1878428001.
`eager_or_lazy` already understands to suppress eagerness changes when the expression type has a significant drop impl, but only for initialization of tuple structs or unit structs. This changes it to also avoid changing it for `Self { .. }` and `TypeWithDrop { .. }`
changelog: [`unnecessary_lazy_eval`]: don't suggest changing eagerness for struct literal syntax when type has a significant drop impl
