Using `default` to construct a unit struct increases code complexity and
adds a function call. This can be avoided by simply removing the call to
`default` and simply construct by name.
New lint: detect `if` expressions with simple boolean assignments to the same target
Closes#10430
changelog: [`needless_bool_assign`] new lint to detect simple boolean assignment to the same target in `if` branches
Added the `[unnecessary_box_returns]` lint
fixes#5
I'm not confident in the name of this lint. Let me know if you can think of something better
---
changelog: New lint: ``[`unnecessary_box_returns`]``
[#9102](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust-clippy/pull/9102)
<!-- changelog_checked -->
Add `collection_is_never_read`
Fixes#9267
`@flip1995` and `@llogiq,` I talked with you about this one at Rust Nation in London last week. :-)
This is my first contribution to Clippy, so lots of feedback would be greatly appreciated.
- \[ ] 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`
`dogfood` found one true positive (see #9509) and no false positives.
`lintcheck` found no (true or false) positives, even when running on an extended set of crates.
---
changelog: new lint [`collection_is_never_read`]
[#10415](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust-clippy/pull/10415)
<!-- changelog_checked -->
Add `impl_trait_in_params` lint
As this is a lint about style, and using `impl Trait` is purely cosmetical (even with downsides), a lot of unrelated files needed to allow this lint.
---
Resolves#10030
changelog: New lint: [`impl_trait_in_params`]
[10197](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust-clippy/pull/10197)
<!-- changelog_checked -->
Add question-mark-used lint
This lint complains when the question mark operator (try operator) is used. This is a restriction lint that can be useful on local scopes where a custom error handling macro is supposed to be used to augment the error based on local scope data before returning.
Fixes#10340
---
changelog: New lint [`question_mark_used`]
[#10342](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust-clippy/pull/10342)
<!-- changelog_checked -->
Add `let_underscore_untyped`
Fixes#6842
This adds a new pedantic `let_underscore_untyped` lint which checks for `let _ = <expr>`, and suggests to either provide a type annotation, or to remove the `let` keyword. That way the author is forced to specify the type they intended to ignore, and thus get forced to re-visit the decision should the type of `<expr>` change. Alternatively, they can drop the `let` keyword to truly just ignore the value no matter what.
r? `@llogiq`
changelog: New lint: [let_underscore_untyped]
[significant_drop_tightening] Add MVP
cc #9399
Creates the lint with minimum functionalities, which is a good start IMO.
---
changelog: new lint: [`significant_drop_tightening`]
[#10163](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust-clippy/pull/10163)
<!-- changelog_checked -->
As this is a lint about "style", and a purely cosmetical choice (using `<A: Trait>` over `impl Trait`), a lot of other files needed to be allowed this lint.
This lint complains when the question mark operator (try operator)
is used. This is a restriction lint that can be useful on local
scopes where a custom error handling macro is supposed to be used
to augment the error based on local scope data before returning.
Add size_of_ref lint
This addresses #9995, which is likely raising a valid point about `std::mem::size_of_val()`: It's [very easy to use double-references as the argument](https://github.com/apache/arrow-datafusion/pull/4371#discussion_r1032385224), which the function will happily accept and give back the size of _the reference_, not the size of the value _behind_ the reference. In the worst case, if the value matches the programmer's expectation, this seems to work, while in fact, everything will go horribly wrong e.g. on a different platform.
The size of a `&T` is independent of what `T` is, and people might want to use `std::mem::size_of_val()` to actually get the size of _any_ reference (e.g. via `&&()`). I would rather suggest that this is always bad behavior, though ([instead](https://doc.rust-lang.org/reference/type-layout.html#pointers-and-references-layout), [and](https://doc.rust-lang.org/stable/std/primitive.usize.html#associatedconstant.BITS)). I, therefore, put this lint into `correctness`.
Since the problem is usually easily fixed by removing extra `&`, I went light on suggesting code.
---
changelog: New lint: [`size_of_ref`]
[#10098](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust-clippy/pull/10098)
<!-- changelog_checked -->
