lint when calling the blanket `Into` impl from a `From` impl
Closes#11150
```
warning: function cannot return without recursing
--> x.rs:9:9
|
9 | / fn from(value: f32) -> Self {
10 | | value.into()
11 | | }
| |_________^
|
note: recursive call site
--> x.rs:10:13
|
10 | value.into()
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^
```
I'm also thinking that we can probably generalize this lint to #11032 at some point (instead of hardcoding a bunch of impls), like how rustc's `unconditional_recursion` works, at least up to one indirect call, but this still seems useful for now :)
I've also noticed that we use `fn_def_id` in a bunch of lints and then try to get the node args of the call in a separate step, so I made a helper function that does both in one. I intend to refactor a bunch of uses of `fn_def_id` to use this later
I can add more test cases, but this is already using much of the same logic that exists for the other impls that this lint looks for (e.g. making sure that there are no conditional returns).
changelog: [`unconditional_recursion`]: emit a warning inside of `From::from` when unconditionally calling the blanket `.into()` impl
chore: fix some typos
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.
It's also helpful for us that the lint name is put within backticks (`` ` ` ``),
and then encapsulated by square brackets (`[]`), for example:
```
changelog: [`lint_name`]: your change
```
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.
- \[x] 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
- \[x] 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)*
changelog:
Move `iter_nth` to `style`, add machine applicable suggestion
There's no `O(n)` involved with `.iter().nth()` on the linted types since the iterator implementations provide `nth` and/or `advance_by` that operate in `O(1)`
For slice iterators the codegen is equivalent, `VecDeque`'s iterator seems to codegen differently but that doesn't seem significant enough to keep it as a perf lint
changelog: [`iter_nth`] Move to `style`
r? `@flip1995`
[`manual_retain`]: Fix duplicate diagnostics
Relates to: #12379
The first lint guard executed in `LateLintPass::check_expr` was testing if the parent was of type `ExprKind::Assign`. This meant the lint emitted on both sides of the assignment operator when `check_expr` is called on either `Expr`. The guard in the fix only lints once when the `Expr` is of kind `Assign`.
changelog: Fix duplicate lint diagnostic emission from [`manual_retain`]
Add new `duplicated_attributes` lint
It's a lint idea that `@llogiq` gave me while reviewing another PR.
There are some limitations, in particular for the "output". Initially I wanted to make it possible for directly lint against the whole attribute if its parts were all duplicated, but then I realized that the output would be chaotic if the duplicates were coming from different attributes, so I preferred to go to the simplest way and simply emit a warning for each entry. Not the best, but makes the implementation much easier.
Another limitation is that `cfg_attr` would be a bit more tricky to implement because we need to check if two `cfg` sets are exactly the same. I added a FIXME and will likely come back to it later.
And finally, I updated the `cargo dev update_lints` command because the generated `tests/ui/rename.rs` file was emitting the `duplicated_attributes` lint, so I allowed this lint inside it to prevent it from working.
changelog: Add new `duplicated_attributes` lint
[`single_match`]: Fix duplicate diagnostics
Relates to #12379
edit two test file
`tests/ui/single_match_else.rs`
`tests/ui/single_match.rs`
those two test file point to the same lint
---
changelog: [`single_match`] Fix duplicate diagnostics
[`mut_mut`]: Fix duplicate diags
Relates to #12379
The `mut_mut` lint produced two diagnostics for each `mut mut` pattern in `ty` inside `block`s because `MutVisitor::visit_ty` was called from `MutMut::check_ty` and `MutMut::check_block` independently. This PR fixes the issue.
---
changelog: [`mut_mut`]: Fix duplicate diagnostics
New lint `const_is_empty`
This lint detects calls to `.is_empty()` on an entity initialized from a string literal and flag them as suspicious. To avoid triggering on macros called from generated code, it checks that the `.is_empty()` receiver, the call itself and the initialization come from the same context.
Fixes#12307
changelog: [`const_is_empty`]: new lint
fix [`missing_docs_in_private_items`] on some proc macros
fixes: #12197
---
changelog: [`missing_docs_in_private_items`] support manually search for docs as fallback method
Remove double expr lint
Related to #12379.
Previously the code manually checked nested binop exprs in unary exprs, but those were caught anyway by `check_expr`. Removed that code path, the path is used in the tests.
---
changelog: [`nonminimal_bool`] Remove duplicate output on nested Binops in Unary exprs.
Add `assigning_clones` lint
This PR is a "revival" of https://github.com/rust-lang/rust-clippy/pull/10613 (with `@kpreid's` permission).
I tried to resolve most of the unresolved things from the mentioned PR:
1) The lint now checks properly if we indeed call the functions `std::clone::Clone::clone` or `std::borrow::ToOwned::to_owned`.
2) It now supports both method and function (UFCS) calls.
3) A heuristic has been added to decide if the lint should apply. It will only apply if the type on which the method is called has a custom implementation of `clone_from/clone_into`. Notably, it will not trigger for types that use `#[derive(Clone)]`.
4) `Deref` handling has been (hopefully) a bit improved, but I'm not sure if it's ideal yet.
I also added a bunch of additional tests.
There are a few things that could be improved, but shouldn't be blockers:
1) When the right-hand side is a function call, it is transformed into e.g. `::std::clone::Clone::clone(...)`. It would be nice to either auto-import the `Clone` trait or use the original path and modify it (e.g. `clone::Clone::clone` -> `clone::Clone::clone_from`). I don't know how to modify the `QPath` to do that though.
2) The lint currently does not trigger when the left-hand side is a local variable without an initializer. This is overly conservative, since it could trigger when the variable has no initializer, but it has been already initialized at the moment of the function call, e.g.
```rust
let mut a;
...
a = Foo;
...
a = b.clone(); // Here the lint should trigger, but currently doesn't
```
These cases probably won't be super common, but it would be nice to make the lint more precise. I'm not sure how to do that though, I'd need access to some dataflow analytics or something like that.
changelog: new lint [`assigning_clones`]
[`misrefactored_assign_op`]: Fix duplicate diagnostics
Relate to #12379
The following diagnostics appear twice
```
--> tests/ui/assign_ops2.rs:26:5
|
LL | a *= a * a;
| ^^^^^^^^^^
|
help: did you mean `a = a * a` or `a = a * a * a`? Consider replacing it with
```
because `a` (lhs) appears in both left operand and right operand in the right hand side.
This PR fixes the issue so that if a diagnostic is created for an operand, the check of the other operand will be skipped. It's fine because the result is always the same in the affected operators.
changelog: [`misrefactored_assign_op`]: Fix duplicate diagnostics
Don't emit "missing backticks" lint if the element is wrapped in `<code>` HTML tags
Fixes#9473.
changelog: Don't emit "missing backticks" lint if the element is wrapped in `<code>` HTML tags
Existing names for values of this type are `sess`, `parse_sess`,
`parse_session`, and `ps`. `sess` is particularly annoying because
that's also used for `Session` values, which are often co-located, and
it can be difficult to know which type a value named `sess` refers to.
(That annoyance is the main motivation for this change.) `psess` is nice
and short, which is good for a name used this much.
The commit also renames some `parse_sess_created` values as
`psess_created`.
Add missing header for `manual_is_variant_and`
Noticed this while generating our lint completions failed in rust-analyzer (separate PR from https://github.com/rust-lang/rust-clippy/pull/12415 as I made these via the github interface quickly)
changelog: none
[`identity_op`]: Fix duplicate diagnostics
Relates to #12379
In the `identity_op` lint, the following diagnostic was emitted two times
```
--> tests/ui/identity_op.rs:156:5
|
LL | 1 * 1;
| ^^^^^ help: consider reducing it to: `1`
|
```
because both of the left operand and the right operand are the identity element of the multiplication.
This PR fixes the issue so that if a diagnostic is created for an operand, the check of the other operand will be skipped. It's fine because the result is always the same in the affected operators.
---
changelog: [`identity_op`]: Fix duplicate diagnostics
Check for try blocks in `question_mark` more consistently
Fixes#12337
I split this PR up into two commits since this moves a method out of an `impl`, which makes for a pretty bad diff (the `&self` parameter is now unused, and there isn't a reason for that function to be part of the `impl` now).
The first commit is the actual relevant change and the 2nd commit just moves stuff (github's "hide whitespace" makes the diff easier to look at)
------------
Now for the actual issue:
`?` within `try {}` blocks desugars to a `break` to the block, rather than a `return`, so that changes behavior in those cases.
The lint has multiple patterns to look for and in *some* of them it already does correctly check whether we're in a try block, but this isn't done for all of its patterns.
We could add another `self.inside_try_block()` check to the function that looks for `let-else-return`, but I chose to actually just move those checks out and instead have them in `LintPass::check_{stmt,expr}`. This has the advantage that we can't (easily) accidentally forget to add that check in new patterns that might be added in the future.
(There's also a bit of a subtle interaction between two lints, where `question_mark`'s LintPass calls into `manual_let_else`, so I added a check to make sure we don't avoid linting for something that doesn't have anything to do with `?`)
changelog: [`question_mark`]: avoid linting on try blocks in more cases
fix [`derive_partial_eq_without_eq`] FP on trait projection
fixes: #9413#9319
---
changelog: fix [`derive_partial_eq_without_eq`] FP on trait projection
Well, this is awkward, it works but I don't understand why, why `clippy_utils::ty::implements_trait` couldn't detects the existance of `Eq` trait, even thought it's obviously present in the derive attribute.
