Rename `adjustment::PointerCast` and variants using it to `PointerCoercion`
It makes it sounds like the `ExprKind` and `Rvalue` are supposed to represent all pointer related casts, when in reality their just used to share a little enum variants. Make it clear there these are only coercions and that people who see this and think "why are so many pointer related casts not in these variants" aren't insane.
This enum was added in #59987. I'm not sure whether the variant sharing is actually worth it, but this at least makes it less confusing.
r? oli-obk
`Copy<T>` does in fact not exist. The substs on the trait_ref contain
the `Self` type of the impl as the first parameter, so passing that
to `implements_trait`, which then nicely prepends the `Self` type
for us does not end will.
It makes it sound like the `ExprKind` and `Rvalue` are supposed to represent all pointer related
casts, when in reality their just used to share a some enum variants. Make it clear there these
are only coercion to make it clear why only some pointer related "casts" are in the enum.
Fix regex lints for regex 1.9.0
regex 1.9.0 was [just released](https://blog.burntsushi.net/regex-internals/), which changes where the types are defined. Instead of updating the definitions to the ones in 1.9.0 this PR uses [`def_path_def_ids`](https://doc.rust-lang.org/nightly/nightly-rustc/clippy_utils/fn.def_path_def_ids.html) on the canonical paths so that we don't have to worry about third party crate internals
This means that it still works with older regex versions too, and will for any future layout changes. I tested it with 1.8.4 and 1.9.0
changelog: [`INVALID_REGEX`], [`TRIVIAL_REGEX`]: now works with regex 1.9.0
new lint: `read_line_without_trim`
This adds a new lint that checks for calls to `Stdin::read_line` with a reference to a string that is then attempted to parse into an integer type without first trimming it, which is always going to fail at runtime.
This is something that I've seen happen a lot to beginners, because it's easy to run into when following the example of chapter 2 in the book where it shows how to program a guessing game.
It would be nice if we could point beginners to clippy and tell them "let's see what clippy has to say" and have clippy explain to them why it fails 👀
I think this lint can later be "generalized" to work not just for `Stdin` but also any `BufRead` (which seems to be where the guarantee about the trailing newline comes from) and also, matching/comparing it to a string slice that doesn't end in a newline character (e.g. `input == "foo"` is always going to fail)
changelog: new lint: [`read_line_without_trim`]
[`useless_vec`]: add more tests and don't lint inside of macros
Closes#11084.
I realized that the fix I added in #11081 itself also causes an error in a suggestion when inside of a macro. Example:
```rs
macro_rules! x {
() => {
for _ in vec![1, 2] {}
}
}
x!();
```
Here it would suggest replacing `vec![1, 2]` with `[x!()]`, because that's what the source callsite is (reminder: it does this to get the correct span of `x!()` for code like `for _ in vec![x!()]`), but that's wrong when *inside* macros, so I decided to make it not lint if the whole loop construct is inside a macro to avoid this issue.
changelog: [`useless_vec`]: add more tests and don't lint inside of macros
r? `@Alexendoo` since these were your tests, I figured it makes most sense to assign you
Don't lint manual_let_else in cases where ? would work
Don't lint `manual_let_else` where the question mark operator `?` would be sufficient, that is, mostly in cases like:
```Rust
let v = if let Some(v) = ex { v } else { return None };
```
Also, this PR emits the `question_mark` lint for `let...else` patterns that could be written with `?` (also, only `return None` like cases).
```
changelog: [`manual_let_else`]: don't lint in cases where question_mark already lints
changelog: [`question_mark`]: lint for `let Some(...) = ex else { return None };`
```
Fixes #8755
[`useless_vec`]: use the source span for initializer
Fixes#11075.
changelog: [`useless_vec`]: use the source span for the initializer expression when inside of a macro
[`arc_with_non_send_sync`]: don't lint if type has nested type parameters
Fixes#11076
changelog: [`arc_with_non_send_sync`]: don't lint if type has nested type parameters
r? `@Manishearth`
new lint: `type_id_on_box`
Closes#7687.
A new lint that detects calling `.type_id()` on `Box<dyn Any>` (and not on the underlying `dyn Any`), which can make up for some pretty confusing bugs!
changelog: new lint: [`type_id_on_box`]
[`missing_fields_in_debug`]: make sure self type is an adt
Fixes#11063, another ICE that can only happen in core.
This lint needs the `DefId` of the implementor to get its fields, but that ICEs if the implementor does not have a `DefId` (as is the case with primitive types, e.g. `impl Debug for bool`), which is where this ICE comes from.
This PR changes the check I added in #10897 to be more... robust against `Debug` implementations we don't want to lint.
Instead of just checking if the self type is a type parameter and "special casing" one specific case we don't want to lint, we should probably rather just check that the self type is either a struct, an enum or a union and only then continue.
That prevents weird edge cases like this one that can only happen in core.
Again, I don't know if it's even possible to add a test case for this since one cannot implement `Debug` for primitive types outside of the crate that defined `Debug` (core).
I did make sure that this PR no longer ICEs on `impl<T> Debug for T` and `impl Debug for bool`.
Maybe writing such a test is possible with `#![no_core]` and then re-defining the `Debug` trait or something like that...?
changelog: [`missing_fields_in_debug`]: make sure self type is an adt (fixes an ICE in core)
r? `@Alexendoo` (reviewed the last PRs for this lint)
`let_and_return`: lint 'static lifetimes, don't lint borrows in closures
Fixes#11056
Now also ignores functions returning `'static` lifetimes, since I noticed the `stdin.lock()` example was still being linted but doesn't need to be since https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/93965
changelog: none
Make simd_shuffle_indices use valtrees
This removes the second-to-last user of the `destructure_mir_constant` query. So in a follow-up we can remove the query and just move the query provider function directly into pretty printing (which is the last user).
cc `@rust-lang/clippy` there's a small functional change, but I think it is correct?
New lint [`tuple_array_conversions`]
Closes#10748
PS, the implementation is a bit ugly 😅 ~~I will likely refactor soon enough :)~~ Done :D
changelog: New lint [`tuple_array_conversions`]
Also, lint question_mark for `let...else` clauses that can be simplified to use `?`.
This lint isn't perfect as it doesn't support the unstable try blocks.
[significant_drop_tightening] Fix#10413Fix#10413
This is quite a rewrite that unfortunately took a large amount of time. I tried my best to comment what is going on to easy review but feel free to ask any question.
The problem basically is that the current algorithm is only taking into consideration single blocks which means that things like the following don't work or show unpredictable results.
```rust
let mutex = Mutex::new(1);
{
let lock = mutex.lock().unwrap();
{
let _ = *lock;
}
}
```
The solve the issue, each path that refers a lock is now being tracked individually.
```
changelog: [`significant_drop_tightening`]: Lift the restriction of only considerate single blocks
```
New lint [`redundant_at_rest_pattern`]
Closes#11011
It's always a great feeling when a new lint triggers on clippy itself 😄
changelog: New lint [`redundant_at_rest_pattern`]
suggests `is_some_and` over `map().unwrap`
changelog: Enhancement: [`option_map_unwrap_or`] now considers the [`msrv`] config when creating the suggestion.
* modified option_map_unwrap_or lint to recognise when an `Option<T>` is mapped to an `Option<bool>` with false being used when `None` is detected; suggests the use of `is_some_and` instead
* msrv is set to 1.70.0 for this lint; when `is_some_and` was stabilised
fixes#9125
[`question_mark`]: don't lint inside of `try` block
Fixes#8628.
Diff looks a bit noisy because I had to move the two functions into an impl, because they now need to access the structs `try_block_depth` field to see if they're inside a try block.
changelog: [`question_mark`]: don't lint inside of `try` block
[`option_if_let_else`]: suggest `.as_ref()` if scrutinee is of type `&Option<_>`
Fixes#10729
`Option::map_or` takes ownership, so if matching on an `&Option<_>`, we need to suggest `.as_ref()` before calling `map_or` to get the same effect and to not cause a borrowck error.
changelog: [`option_if_let_else`]: suggest `.as_ref()`/`.as_mut()` if scrutinee is of type `&Option<_>`/`&mut Option<_>`
[`unused_async`]: don't lint if function is part of a trait
Fixes#10459.
We shouldn't lint if the function is part of a trait, because the user won't be able to easily remove the `async`, as this will then not match with the function signature in the trait definition
changelog: [`unused_async`]: don't lint if function is part of a trait
`hir`: Add `Become` expression kind (explicit tail calls experiment)
This adds `hir::ExprKind::Become` alongside ast lowering. During hir-thir lowering we currently lower `become` as `return`, so that we can partially test `become` without ICEing.
cc `@scottmcm`
r? `@Nilstrieb`
Check if `if` conditions always evaluate to true in `never_loop`
This fixes the example provided in #11004, but it shouldn't be closed as this is still an issue on like
```rust
let x = true;
if x { /* etc */ }`
```
This also makes `clippy_utils::consts::constant` handle `ConstBlock` and `DropTemps`.
changelog: [`never_loop`]: Check if `if` conditions always evaluate to true
Lint `mem_forget` if any fields are `Drop`
Closes#9298
I think this way of doing it (`needs_drop`) should be fine.
---
changelog: Enhancement: [`mem_forget`]: Now lints on types with fields that implement `Drop`
[#10996](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust-clippy/pull/10996)
[`format_push_string`]: look through `match` and `if` expressions
Closes#9493.
changelog: [`format_push_string`]: look through `match` and `if` expressions
[`get_unwrap`]: include a borrow in the suggestion if argument is not an integer literal
Fixes#9909
I have to say, I don't really understand what the previous logic was trying to do, but this fixes the linked bug.
It was checking if the argument passed to `.get()` can be parsed as a usize (i.e. if it's an integer literal, probably?), and if not, it wouldn't include a borrow? I don't know how we came to that conclusion, but that logic doesn't work:
```rs
let slice = &[1, 2];
let _r: &i32 = slice.get({ 1 }).unwrap();
// previous suggestion: slice[{ 1 }]
// the suggestion should be: &slice[{ 1 }]
```
Here the argument passed to it isn't an integer literal, but it should still include a borrow, because it would otherwise change the type from `&i32` to `i32`.
The exception is that if the parent of the `get().unwrap()` expr is a dereference or a method call or the like, we don't need an explicit borrow because it's automatically inserted by the compiler
changelog: [`get_unwrap`]: include a borrow in the suggestion if argument is not an integer literal
Don't lint [`iter_nth_zero`] in `next`
Closes#9820
This also *slightlyy* modifies the output of `iter_nth`, as I noticed the types' names weren't in backticks
changelog: [`iter_nth_zero`]: No longer lints in implementations of `Iterator::next`
[`single_match`]: don't lint if block contains comments
Fixes#8634
It now ignores matches with a comment in the "else" arm
changelog: [`single_match`]: don't lint if block contains comments
`items_after_test_module`: Ignore in-proc-macros items
The library `test-case` is having some problems with this lint, ignoring proc macros should fix it.
Related to #10713 and frondeus/test-case#122
(Couldn't add test cases for this exact situation without importing the library, but I think the fix is simple enough that we can be pretty sure there won't be any problems :) )
changelog:[`items_after_test_module`]: Ignore items in procedural macros
[`redundant_closure_call`]: handle nested closures
Fixes#9956.
This ended up being a much larger change than I'd thought, and I ended up having to pretty much rewrite it as a late lint pass, because it needs access to certain things that I don't think are available in early lint passes (e.g. getting the parent expr). I think this'll be required to fi-x #10922 anyway, so this is probably fine.
(edit: had to write "fi-x" because "fix" makes github think that this PR fixes it, which it doesn't 😅 )
Previously, it would suggest changing `(|| || 42)()()` to `|| 42()`, which is a type error (it needs parens: `(|| 42)()`). In my opinion, though, the suggested fix should have really been `42`, so that's what this PR changes.
changelog: [`redundant_closure_call`]: handle nested closures and rewrite as a late lint pass
Fix false positive of [self_named_module_files] and [mod_module_files]
changelog: [self_named_module_files] [mod_module_files]: No longer lints dependencies located in subdirectory of workspace
fixes#8887
---
First time contributor here, just read contribution guide today.
I have several questions:
1. ~Is it the correct way to use environment variable `CARGO_HOME` to get the location of cargo home directory?~
(Edit: Code no longer uses CARGO_HOME)
2. How to setup test for this PR? This involves multiple files and `CARGO_HOME` setup. ~Not sure how to do this.~
~Edit: Working on tests right now~ A workspace_test has been added
[`arithmetic_side_effects`] Fix#10792Fix#10792
```
changelog: [`arithmetic_side_effects`]: Retrieve field values of structures that are in constant environments
```
Ignore more type aliases in `unnecessary_cast`
This is potentially the worst code I've ever written, and even if not, it's very close to being on par with starb. This will ignore `call() as i32` and `local_obtained_from_call as i32` now.
This should fix every reasonable way to reproduce #10555, but likely not entirely.
changelog: Ignore more type aliases in `unnecessary_cast`
[`missing_panics_doc`]: pickup expect method
close#10240
*Please write a short comment explaining your change (or "none" for internal only changes)*
changelog: [`missing_panics_doc`]: pickup expect method
new lint: `drain_collect`
Closes#10818.
This adds a new lint that looks for `.drain(..).collect()` and suggests replacing it with `mem::take`.
changelog: [`drain_collect`]: new lint
[`match_same_arms`]: don't lint if `non_exhaustive_omitted_patterns`
Fixes#10327
changelog: [`match_same_arms`]: Don't lint if `non_exhaustive_omitted_patterns` is `warn` or `deny`
from_over_into: Show suggestions for non-Self expanded paths
changelog: [`from_over_into`]: Show suggestions when the body contains macros not expanding to `Self`
Currently any path in a macro expansion causes the suggestion to be hidden, meaning most macro calls cause it to be hidden
Now it's only hidden if the expansion contains `Self`
[`unnecessary_fold`]: suggest turbofish if necessary
Fixes#10000
This adds turbofish `::<T>` to the suggestion in `unnecessary_fold`. This is necessary because the `Sum` trait is generic, which breaks inference when changing `fold()` to `sum()`.
changelog: [`unnecessary_fold`]: suggest turbofish if necessary
new lint [`single_range_in_vec_init`]
Lints on `vec![0..200]` (or `[0..200]`), suggesting either `(0..200).collect::<Vec<i32>>()` or `[0; 200]`.
Haven't tested it with anything that isn't primitive. Probably should!
Closes#10932
changelog: new lint [`single_range_in_vec_init`]
[`derivable_impls`]: don't lint if `default()` call expr unsize-coerces to trait object
Fixes#10158.
This fixes a FP where the derive-generated Default impl would have different behavior because of unsize coercion from `Box<T>` to `Box<dyn Trait>`:
```rs
struct S {
x: Box<dyn std::fmt::Debug>
}
impl Default for S {
fn default() -> Self {
Self {
x: Box::<()>::default()
// ^~ Box<()> coerces to Box<dyn Debug>
// #[derive(Default)] would call Box::<dyn Debug>::default()
}
}
}
```
(this intentionally only looks for trait objects `dyn` specifically, and not any unsize coercion, e.g. `&[i32; 5]` to `&[i32]`, because that breaks existing tests and isn't actually problematic, as far as I can tell)
changelog: [`derivable_impls`]: don't lint if `default()` call expression unsize-coerces to trait object
[`needless_doctest_main`]: ignore `main()` in `no_test` code fences
close#10491
*Please write a short comment explaining your change (or "none" for internal only changes)*
changelog: [`needless_doctest_main`]: ignore `main()` in `no_test` code fence
[`map_unwrap_or`]: don't lint when referenced variable is moved
Fixes#10579.
The previous way of checking if changing `map(f).unwrap_or(a)` to `map_or(a, f)` is safe had a flaw when the argument to `unwrap_or` moves a binding and the `map` closure references that binding in some way.
It used to simply check if any of the identifiers in the `unwrap_or` argument are referenced in the `map` closure, but it didn't consider the case where the moved binding is referred to through references, for example:
```rs
let x = vec![1, 2];
let x_ref = &x;
Some(()).map(|_| x_ref.clone()).unwrap_or(x);
```
This compiles as is, but we cannot change it to `map_or`. This lint however did suggest changing it, because the simple way of checking if `x` is referenced anywhere in the `map` closure fails here. The safest thing to do here imo (what this PR does) is check if the moved value `x` is referenced *anywhere* in the body (before the `unwrap_or` call). One can always create a reference to the value and smuggle them into the closure, without actually referring to `x`. The original, linked issue shows another one such example:
```rs
let x = vec![1,2,3,0];
let y = x.strip_suffix(&[0]).map(|s| s.to_vec()).unwrap_or(x);
```
`x.strip_suffix(&[0])` creates a reference to `x` that is available through `s` inside of the `map` closure, so we can't change it to `map_or`.
changelog: [`map_unwrap_or`]: don't lint when referenced variable is moved
[`no_effect`]: Suggest adding `return` if applicable
Closes#10941
Unfortunately doesn't catch anything complex as `no_effect` already wouldn't, but I'm fine with that (it catches `ControlFlow` at least :D)
changelog: [`no_effect`]: Suggest adding `return` if statement has same type as function's return type and is the last statement in a block
[`useless_vec`]: lint on `vec![_]` invocations that adjust to a slice
Fixes#2262 (well, actually my PR over at #10901 did do most of the stuff, but this PR implements the one last other case mentioned in the comments that my PR didn't fix)
Before this change, it would lint `(&vec![1]).iter().sum::<i32>()`, but not `vec![1].iter().sum::<i32>()`. This PR handles this case.
This also refactors a few things that I wanted to do in my other PR but forgot about.
changelog: [`useless_vec`]: lint on `vec![_]` invocations that adjust to a slice
Don't linting `as_conversions` in proc macros
Don't linting `as_conversions` if code was generated by procedural macro.
This PR fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust-clippy/issues/9657
I implemented the fix changing the lint code to be a `LateLintPass` in order to be able to use the `is_from_proc_macro` out of the box. If the reviwer thinks that it would be better to do the other way (implementing `WithSearchPat`) just let me know. I might need some help in implementing it for the `ustc_ast::ast::Expr`
changelog: [`as_conversions`] avoiding warnings in macro-generated code
Extend `explicit_iter_loop` and `explicit_into_iter_loop`
fixes#1518
Some included cleanups
* Split `for_loop` test into different files for each lint (partially).
* Move handling of some `into_iter` cases from `explicit_into_iter`.
---
changelog: Enhancement: [`explicit_iter_loop`]: Now also handles types that implement `IntoIterator`.
[#10416](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust-clippy/pull/10416)
changelog: Sugg: [`explicit_into_iter_loop`]: The suggestion now works on mutable references.
[#10416](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust-clippy/pull/10416)
<!-- changelog_checked -->
Add `needless_if` lint
first off: Sorry about the large diff. Seems a ton of tests do this (understandably so).
this is basically everything I wanted in #10868, while it doesn't lint *all* unnecessary empty blocks, it lints needless if statements; which are basically the crux of the issue (for me) anyway. I've committed code that includes this far too many times 😅 hopefully clippy can help me out soon
closes#10868
changelog: New lint [`needless_if`]
Fix `diverging_sub_expression` not checking body of block
Fixes#10776
This also adds a warning to the test `ui/never_loop.rs`, not sure if this is correct or not.
changelog: [`diverging_sub_expression`]: Fix false negatives with body of block
Uplift `clippy::undropped_manually_drops` lint
This PR aims at uplifting the `clippy::undropped_manually_drops` lint.
## `undropped_manually_drops`
(warn-by-default)
The `undropped_manually_drops` lint check for calls to `std::mem::drop` with a value of `std::mem::ManuallyDrop` which doesn't drop.
### Example
```rust
struct S;
drop(std::mem::ManuallyDrop::new(S));
```
### Explanation
`ManuallyDrop` does not drop it's inner value so calling `std::mem::drop` will not drop the inner value of the `ManuallyDrop` either.
-----
Mostly followed the instructions for uplifting an clippy lint described here: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/99696#pullrequestreview-1134072751
`@rustbot` label: +I-lang-nominated
r? compiler
-----
For Clippy:
changelog: Moves: Uplifted `clippy::undropped_manually_drops` into rustc
