Issue 8733: Suggest `str.lines` when splitting at hard-coded newlines
Fixes#8733.
```
changelog: [`splitting_strings_at_newlines`]: New lint that suggests `str.lines` over splitting at hard-coded newlines
```
This is my first PR to Clippy and one of my first Rust PRs in general -- please feel free to nitpick, I'm thankful for any opportunity to learn! I'd be especially interested in feedback to the following points:
* Is checking for `'\n'`, `"\n"`, and `"\r\n"` as arguments to `split` enough, or should we do more (e.g. checking for constants that have those values if that is possible)?
* Could the code be written in a more idiomatic way?
* Is the default `".."` for `snippet` a good choice? I copied it from other uses of `snippet` in the code base, but I'm not entirely sure.
* Is the category `suspicious` a good choice?
* Is the suggestion applicability `MaybeIncorrect` a good choice? I used it because the return type of `lines` is not exactly the same as that of `split`.
Extend UNCONDITIONAL_RECURSION to check for ToString implementations
Follow-up of https://github.com/rust-lang/rust-clippy/pull/11938.
r? `@llogiq`
changelog: Extend `UNCONDITIONAL_RECURSION` to check for `ToString` implementations
New Lint: empty_enum_variants_with_brackets
This PR:
- adds a new early pass lint that checks for enum variants with no fields that were defined using brackets. **Category: Restriction**
- adds relevant UI tests for the new lint.
Closes#12007
```
changelog: New lint: [`empty_enum_variants_with_brackets`]
```
don't lint [`default_numeric_fallback`] on return and local assigned macro calls with type stated
fixes: #11535
changelog: don't lint [`default_numeric_fallback`] on return and local assigned macro calls with type stated
feat: add `manual_is_variant_and` lint
changelog: add a new lint [`manual_is_variant_and`].
- Replace `option.map(f).unwrap_or_default()` and `result.map(f).unwrap_or_default()` with `option.is_some_and(f)` and `result.is_ok_and(f)` where `f` is a function or closure that returns `bool`.
- MSRV is set to 1.70.0 for this lint; when `is_some_and` and `is_ok_and` was stabilised
---
For example, for the following code:
```rust
let opt = Some(0);
opt.map(|x| x > 1).unwrap_or_default();
```
It suggests to instead write:
```rust
let opt = Some(0);
opt.is_some_and(|x| x > 1)
```
make [`mutex_atomic`] more type aware
fixes: #9872
---
changelog: [`mutex_atomic`] now suggests more specific atomic types and skips mutex i128 and u128
add external macro checks to `iter_without_into_iter` and `into_iter_without_iter`
Fixes#12037
I think it's useful to still lint on local macros, since the user should still be able to add another impl with the `IntoIterator` or `iter` method. I think it's also fairly common to write a macro for generating many impls (e.g. for many similar types), so it'd be nice if we can continue linting in those cases.
For that reason I went with `in_external_macro`.
I also added a test for `#[allow]`ing the lint while I was at it.
changelog: [`iter_without_into_iter`]: don't lint if the `iter` method is defined in an external macro
changelog: [`into_iter_without_iter`]: don't lint if the `IntoIterator` impl is defined in an external macro
When `identity_op` identifies a `no_op`, provides a suggestion, it also
checks the type of the type of the variable. If the variable is
a reference that's been coerced into a value, e.g.
```
let x = &0i32;
let _ = x + 0;
```
the suggestion will now use a derefence. This is done by identifying
whether the variable is a reference to an integral value, and then
whether it gets dereferenced.
changelog: false positive: [`identity_op`]: corrected suggestion for
reference coerced to value.
fixes: #12050
feature: add new lint `pub_underscore_fields`
fixes: #10282
This PR introduces a new lint `pub_underscore_fields` that lints when a user has marked a field of a struct as public, but also prefixed it with an underscore (`_`). This is something users should avoid because the two ideas are contradictory. Prefixing a field with an `_` is inferred as the field being unused, but making a field public infers that it will be used.
- \[x] Followed [lint naming conventions][lint_naming]
- I believe I followed the naming conventions, more than happy to update the naming if I did not :)
- \[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`
---
changelog: new lint: [`pub_underscore_fields`]
[#10283](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust-clippy/pull/10283)
<!-- changelog_checked -->
- add a new late pass lint, with config options
- add ui tests for both variations of config option
- update CHANGELOG.md
github feedback
bump version to 1.77 and run cargo collect-metadata
Change `,` to `;` in `conf.rs`
Remove mitigations for incorrect node args
This change https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/118420/files#r1419874371 adds a missing `write_args` to properly record node args for lang-item calls.
Thus, in the `unnecessary_to_owned` lint, this ensures that the `call_generic_args` extracted by `get_callee_generic_args_and_args` are always correct, and we can remove the mitigation for #9504 and #10021 since the root cause has been fixed.
I'm not sure if there is other now-unnecessary code that can be removed, but this is the one I found when investigating https://github.com/rust-lang/rust-clippy/issues/11965#issuecomment-1871732518.
changelog: none
* Fixes a typo in the name of the lint (`enforce-import-renames`
instead of `enforced-import-renames`).
* Copyedit “Why” paragraph.
* Make the example configuration use a multi-line list, since it is not
particularly expected that a real project will have *exactly one*
rename to enforce (and the old formatting had unbalanced whitespace).
6459: Check for redundant `matches!` with `Ready`, `Pending`, `V4`, `V6`
Fixes#6459.
```
changelog: [`redundant_pattern_matching`]: Add checks for `Poll::{Ready,Pending}` and `IpAddr::{V4,V6}` in `matches!`
```
new lint: `eager_transmute`
A small but still hopefully useful lint that looks for patterns such as `(x < 5).then_some(transmute(x))`.
This is almost certainly wrong because it evaluates the transmute eagerly and can lead to surprises such as the check being completely removed and always evaluating to `Some` no matter what `x` is (it is UB after all when the integer is not a valid bitpattern for the transmuted-to type). [Example](https://godbolt.org/z/xoY34fPzh).
The user most likely meant to use `then` instead.
I can't remember where I saw this but this is inspired by a real bug that happened in practice.
This could probably be a correctness lint?
changelog: new lint: [`eager_int_transmute`]
Make some non-diagnostic-affecting `QPath::LangItem` into regular `QPath`s
The rest of 'em affect diagnostics, so leave them alone... for now.
cc #115178
