Allow allowing of toplevel_ref_arg lint
I'm not sure why some lints need the `HirId` to be able to recognize the
lint level attributes, but this commit makes the lint level attributes
work for `toplevel_ref_arg`.
Fixes#2332
changelog: Allow allowing of `toplevel_ref_arg` lint
Fix false positive in module_name_repetitions lint
This lint was triggering on modules inside expanded attrs, like
for example `#[cfg(test)]` and possibly more.
It was not reporting a location in #3892 because `span.lo()` and `span.hi()` both were 0.
Fixes#3892
changelog: Fix false positive in `module_name_repetitions` lint
I'm not sure why some lints need the `HirId` to be able to recognize the
lint level attributes, but this commit makes the lint level attributes
work for `toplevel_ref_arg`.
Change naive_bytecount applicability to MaybeIncorrect
We can't use `MachineApplicable` here as applying the fix will cause
another error because `bytecount` would first have to be added to the
Cargo.toml.
Example:
```
error: You appear to be counting bytes the naive way
--> $DIR/bytecount.rs:5:13
|
LL | let _ = x.iter().filter(|&&a| a == 0).count(); // naive byte count
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ help: Consider using the bytecount crate: `bytecount::count(x, 0)`
```
Just replacing it with the suggestion is not enough.
cc #3630
Change while_let_loop applicability to HasPlaceholders
The suggestion has been changed at some point to use `..` in the suggested code.
Due to that we can't make the lint MachineApplicable anymore.
cc #3630
This was causing two different ICEs in #3741.
The first was fixed in #3925.
The second one is fixed with this commit: We just don't `expect`
anymore. If the snippet doesn't contain an `else`, we stop emitting the
lint because it's not a suspiciously formatted else anyway.
Fix ICE in decimal_literal_representation lint
Handling the integer parsing properly instead of just unwrapping.
Note that the test is not catching the ICE because plain UI tests
[currently hide ICEs][compiletest_issue]. Once that issue is fixed, this
test would fail properly again.
Fixes#3891
[compiletest_issue]: https://github.com/laumann/compiletest-rs/issues/169
Handling the integer parsing properly instead of just unwrapping.
Note that the test is not catching the ICE because plain UI tests
[currently hide ICEs][compiletest_issue]. Once that issue is fixed, this
test would fail properly again.
[compiletest_issue]: https://github.com/laumann/compiletest-rs/issues/169
Fix `explicit_counter_loop` suggestion
#1670
This code seems to me to work, but I have two question.
* Because range expression desugared in hir, `Sugg::hir` doesn't add parenthesis to range expression. Which function is better to check range do you think, `check_for_loop_explicit_counter` or `hir_from_snippet`?
* Do you think we need to distinguish between range expression and struct expression that creates `std::ops::Range*`?
