[explicit_counter_loop] suggests `.into_iter()`, despite that triggering [into_iter_on_ref] in some cases
I have modified `fn make_iterator_snippet` in clippy_lints/src/loops/utils.rs ,so this change has some little influence on another lint [manual_flatten] .
fixes#8155
---
changelog: Fix that [`explicit_counter_loop`] suggests `into_iter()` despite that triggering [`into_iter_on_ref`] in some cases
single_match: Don't lint non-exhaustive matches; support tuples
`single_match` lint:
* Don't lint exhaustive enum patterns without a wild.
Rationale: The definition of the enum could be changed, so the user can get non-exhaustive match after applying the suggested lint (see https://github.com/rust-lang/rust-clippy/issues/8282#issuecomment-1013566068 for context).
* Lint `match` constructions with tuples (as suggested at https://github.com/rust-lang/rust-clippy/issues/8282#issuecomment-1015621148)
Closes#8282
---
changelog: [`single_match`]: Don't lint exhaustive enum patterns without a wild.
changelog: [`single_match`]: Lint `match` constructions with tuples
Fix underflow in `manual_split_once` lint
Hi, a friend found clippy started crashing on a suspiciously large allocation of `u64::MAX` memory on their code.
The mostly minimized repro is:
```rust
fn _f01(title: &str) -> Option<()> {
let _ = title[1..].splitn(2, '[').next()?;
Some(())
}
```
The underflow happens in this case on line 57 of the patch but I've changed the other substraction to saturating as well since it could potentially cause the same issue.
I'm not sure where to put a regression test, or if it's even worth for such a thing.
Aside, has it been considered before to build clippy with overflow checks enabled?
changelog: fix ICE of underflow in `manual_split_once` lint
Fix `needless_borrow` causing mutable borrows to be moved
fixes#8191
changelog: Fix `needless_borrow` causing mutable borrows to be moved
changelog: Rename `ref_in_deref` to `needless_borrow`
changelog: Suggest removing the borrow on method call receivers in `needless_borrow`
Check usages in `ptr_arg`
fixes#214fixes#1981fixes#3381fixes#6406fixes#6964
This does not take into account the return type of the function currently, so `(&Vec<_>) -> &Vec<_>` functions may still be false positives.
The name given for the type also has to match the real type name, so `type Foo = Vec<u32>` won't trigger the lint, but `type Vec = Vec<u32>` will. I'm not sure if this is the best way to handle this, or if a note about the actual type should be added instead.
changelog: Check if the argument is used in a way which requires the original type in `ptr_arg`
changelog: Lint mutable references in `ptr_arg`
This commit changes the behavior of `single_match` lint.
After that, we won't lint non-exhaustive matches like this:
```rust
match Some(v) {
Some(a) => println!("${:?}", a),
None => {},
}
```
The rationale is that, because the type of `a` could be changed, so the
user can get non-exhaustive match after applying the suggested lint (see
https://github.com/rust-lang/rust-clippy/issues/8282#issuecomment-1013566068
for context).
We also will lint `match` constructions with tuples. When we see the
tuples on the both arms, we will check them both at the same time, and
if they form exhaustive match, we could display the warning.
Closes#8282
Add `msrv` config for `map_clone`
Just a small PR to have some fun with Clippy and to clear my head a bit 😅
---
changelog: [`map_clone`]: The suggestion takes `msrv` into account
changelog: Track `msrv` attribute for `manual_bits` and `borrow_as_prt`
fixes: #8276
fix op_ref false positive
fixes#7572
changelog: `op_ref` don't lint for unnecessary reference in BinOp impl if removing the reference will lead to unconditional recursion
issue #8239: Printed hint for lint or_fun_call is cropped and does no…
fixesrust-lang/rust-clippy#8239
changelog: [`or_fun_call`]: if suggestion contains more lines than MAX_SUGGESTION_HIGHLIGHT_LINES it is stripped to one line
