len_zero: skip ranges if feature `range_is_empty` is not enabled
If the feature is not enabled, calling `is_empty()` on a range is ambiguous. Moreover, the two possible resolutions are unstable methods, one inherent to the range and the other being part of the `ExactSizeIterator` trait.
Since `len_zero` only checks for existing `is_empty()` inherent methods, we only take into account the `range_is_empty` feature.
Related: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/48111#issuecomment-445132965
changelog: len_zero: avoid linting ranges without #![feature(range_is_empty)]
Fixes: #3807
Extend useless conversion
This PR extends `useless_conversion` lint with `TryFrom` and `TryInto`
fixes: #5344
changelog: Extend `useless_conversion` with `TryFrom` and `TryInto`
Make empty_line_after_outer_attr an early lint
Fixes#5567
Unfortunately I couldn't find a way to reproduce the issue without syn/quote. Considering that most real-world macros use syn and/or quote, I think it's okay to pull them in anyway.
changelog: Fix false positive in [`empty_line_after_outer_attr`]
reversed_empty_ranges: add suggestion for &slice[N..N]
As discussed in the issue thread, the user accepted this solution. Let me know if this is what we want, or if changing the way we lint the N..N case is prefered.
changelog: reversed_empty_ranges: add suggestion for &slice[N..N]
Closes#5628
ptr_arg: honor `allow` attribute on arguments
The `intravisit::Visitor` impl for `LateContextAndPass` only takes into account the attributes of a function parameter inside the `check_param` method. `ptr_arg` starts its heuristics at `check_item` / `check_impl_item` / `check_trait_item`, so the `allow` is not taken into account automatically.
changelog: ptr_arg: honor `allow` attribute on arguments
Fixes#5644
option_option test case #4298
Adds regression test case for #4298.
The bug seems still present although rust Playground said otherwise.
changelog: none
new_without_default: do not suggest deriving
---
changelog: do not suggest deriving `Default` in `new_without_default`
This commit changes the behavior of the `new_without_default` lint to not suggest deriving `Default`. This suggestion is misleading if the `new` implementation does something different than what a derived `Default` implementation would do, because then the two methods would not be equivalent.
Instead, the `can_derive_default` check is removed, and we always suggest implementing `Default` in terms of `new()`.
New lint: `match_wildcard_for_single_variants`
changelog: Added a new lint match_wildcard_for_single_variants to warn on enum matches where a wildcard is used to match a single variant
Closes#5556
Rename lint `identity_conversion` to `useless_conversion`
Lint name `identity_conversion` was misleading, so this PR renames it to `useless_conversion`.
As decision has not really came up in the issue comments, this PR will probably need discussion.
fixes#3106
changelog: Rename lint `identity_conversion` to `useless_conversion`
Merge some lints together
This PR merges following lints:
- `block_in_if_condition_expr` and `block_in_if_condition_stmt` → `blocks_in_if_conditions`
- `option_map_unwrap_or`, `option_map_unwrap_or_else` and `result_map_unwrap_or_else` → `map_unwrap`
- `option_unwrap_used` and `result_unwrap_used` → `unwrap_used`
- `option_expect_used` and `result_expect_used` → `expect_used`
- `wrong_pub_self_convention` into `wrong_self_convention`
- `for_loop_over_option` and `for_loop_over_result` → `for_loops_over_fallibles`
Lints that have already been merged since the issue was created:
- [x] `new_without_default` and `new_without_default_derive` → `new_without_default`
Need more discussion:
- `string_add` and `string_add_assign`: do we agree to merge them or not? Is there something more to do? → **not merge finally**
- `identity_op` and `modulo_one` → `useless_arithmetic`: seems outdated, since `modulo_arithmetic` has been created.
fixes#1078
changelog: Merging some lints together:
- `block_in_if_condition_expr` and `block_in_if_condition_stmt` → `blocks_in_if_conditions`
- `option_map_unwrap_or`, `option_map_unwrap_or_else` and `result_map_unwrap_or_else` → `map_unwrap_or`
- `option_unwrap_used` and `result_unwrap_used` → `unwrap_used`
- `option_expect_used` and `result_expect_used` → `expect_used`
- `for_loop_over_option` and `for_loop_over_result` → `for_loops_over_fallibles`
identity_op: allow `1 << 0`
I went for accepting `1 << 0` verbatim instead of something more general as it seems to be what everyone in the issue thread needed.
changelog: identity_op: allow `1 << 0` as it's a common pattern in bit manipulation code.
Fixes#3430
Reversed empty ranges
This lint checks range expressions with inverted limits which result in empty ranges. This includes also the ranges used to index slices.
The lint reverse_range_loop was covering iteration of reversed ranges in a for loop, which is a subset of what this new lint covers, so it has been removed. I'm not sure if that's the best choice. It would be doable to check in the new lint that we are not in the arguments of a for loop; I went for removing it because the logic was too similar to keep them separated.
changelog: Added reversed_empty_ranges lint that checks for ranges where the limits have been inverted, resulting in empty ranges. Removed reverse_range_loop which was covering a subset of the new lint.
Closes#4192Closes#96
Fix match on vec items: match on vec[..]
- Added new tests
- Fixed false positive when matching on full range, which will never panic
Closes#5551
changelog: fix match_on_vec_items when matching full range
Fix `unnecessary_unwrap` lint when checks are done in parameters
Fixes a false positive in `unnecessary_unwrap` lint when checks are done in macro parameters.
FIxes#5174
changelog: Fixes a false positive in `unnecessary_unwrap` lint when checks are done in macro parameters.
Fix FP on while-let-on-iterator
- fix `is_refutable` for slice patterns
- fix `is_refutable` for bindings
- add some TODO-s for cases, which can not be fixed easily
fixes#3780
changelog: fix FP on while-let-on-iterator for arrays and bindings
Implement the manual_non_exhaustive lint
Some implementation notes:
* Not providing automatic fixups because additional changes may be needed in other parts of the code, e.g. when constructing a struct.
* Even though the attribute is valid on enum variants, it's not possible to use the manual implementation of the pattern because the visibility is always public, so the lint ignores enum variants.
* Unit structs are also ignored, it's not possible to implement the pattern manually without fields.
* The attribute is not accepted in unions, so those are ignored too.
* Even though the original issue did not mention it, tuple structs are also linted because it's possible to apply the pattern manually.
changelog: Added the manual non-exhaustive implementation lint
Closes#2017
Fix the bugs of `manual_memcpy`, simplify the suggestion and refactor it
While I’m working on the long procrastinated work to expand `manual_memcpy`(#1670), I found a few minor bugs and probably unidiomatic or old coding style. There is a brief explanation of changes to the behaviour this PR will make below. And, I have a questoin: do I need to add tests for the first and second fixed bugs? I thought it might be too rare cases to include the tests for those. I added for the last one though.
* Bug fix
* It negates resulted offsets (`src/dst_offset`) when `offset` is subtraction by 0. This PR will remove any subtraction by 0 as a part of minification.
```rust
for i in 0..5 {
dst[i - 0] = src[i];
}
```
```diff
warning: it looks like you're manually copying between slices
--> src/main.rs:2:14
|
LL | for i in 0..5 {
- | ^^^^ help: try replacing the loop by: `dst[..-5].clone_from_slice(&src[..5])`
+ | ^^^^ help: try replacing the loop by: `dst[..5].clone_from_slice(&src[..5])`
|
```
* It prints `RangeTo` or `RangeFull` when both of `end` and `offset` are 0, which have different meaning. This PR will print 0. I could reject the cases `end` is 0, but I thought I won’t catch other cases `reverse_range_loop` will trigger, and it’s over to catch every such cases.
```rust
for i in 0..0 {
dst[i] = src[i];
}
```
```diff
warning: it looks like you're manually copying between slices
--> src/main.rs:2:14
|
LL | for i in 0..0 {
- | ^^^^ help: try replacing the loop by: `dst.clone_from_slice(&src[..])`
+ | ^^^^ help: try replacing the loop by: `dst[..0].clone_from_slice(&src[..0])`
|
```
* it prints four dots when `end` is `None`. This PR will ignore any `for` loops without `end` because a `for` loop that takes `RangeFrom` as its argument and contains indexing without the statements or the expressions that end loops such as `break` will definitely panic, and `manual_memcpy` should ignore the loops with such control flow.
```rust
fn manual_copy(src: &[u32], dst: &mut [u32]) {
for i in 0.. {
dst[i] = src[i];
}
}
```
```diff
-warning: it looks like you're manually copying between slices
- --> src/main.rs:2:14
- |
-LL | for i in 0.. {
- | ^^^ help: try replacing the loop by: `dst[....].clone_from_slice(&src[....])`
- |
```
* Simplification of the suggestion
* It prints 0 when `start` or `end` and `offset` are same (from #3323). This PR will use `RangeTo`
changelog: fixed the bugs of `manual_memcpy` and also simplify the suggestion.
New lint `match_vec_item`
Added new lint to warn a match on index item which can panic. It's always better to use `get(..)` instead.
Closes#5500
changelog: New lint `match_on_vec_items`
- Show just one error message with multiple suggestions in case of
using multiple times an OS in target family position
- Only suggest #[cfg(unix)] when the OS is in the Unix family
- Test all the operating systems
Don't trigger while_let_on_iterator when the iterator is recreated every iteration
r? @phansch
Fixes#1654
changelog: Fix false positive in [`while_let_on_iterator`]
Downgrade match_bool to pedantic
I don't quite buy the justification in https://rust-lang.github.io/rust-clippy/. The justification is:
> It makes the code less readable.
In the Rust codebases I've worked in, I have found people were comfortable using `match bool` (selectively) to make code more readable. For example, initializing struct fields is a place where the indentation of `match` can work better than the indentation of `if`:
```rust
let _ = Struct {
v: {
...
},
w: match doing_w {
true => ...,
false => ...,
},
x: Nested {
c: ...,
b: ...,
a: ...,
},
y: if doing_y {
...
} else { // :(
...
},
z: ...,
};
```
Or sometimes people prefer something a bit less pithy than `if` when the meaning of the bool doesn't read off clearly from the condition:
```rust
if set.insert(...) {
... // ???
} else {
...
}
match set.insert(...) {
// set.insert returns false if already present
false => ...,
true => ...,
}
```
Or `match` can be a better fit when the bool is playing the role more of a value than a branch condition:
```rust
impl ErrorCodes {
pub fn from(b: bool) -> Self {
match b {
true => ErrorCodes::Yes,
false => ErrorCodes::No,
}
}
}
```
And then there's plain old it's-1-line-shorter, which means we get 25% more content on a screen when stacking a sequence of conditions:
```rust
let old_noun = match old_binding.is_import() {
true => "import",
false => "definition",
};
let new_participle = match new_binding.is_import() {
true => "imported",
false => "defined",
};
```
Bottom line is I think this lint fits the bill better as a pedantic lint; I don't think linting on this by default is justified.
changelog: Remove match_bool from default set of enabled lints
Fixes#4226
This introduces the lint await_holding_lock. For async functions, we iterate
over all types in generator_interior_types and look for types named MutexGuard,
RwLockReadGuard, or RwLockWriteGuard. If we find one then we emit a lint.
If let else mutex
changelog: Adds lint to catch incorrect use of `Mutex::lock` in `if let` expressions with lock calls in any of the blocks.
closes: #5219
Fix issue #2907.
Update the "borrow box" lint to avoid recommending the following
conversion:
```
// Old
pub fn f(&mut Box<T>) {...}
// New
pub fn f(&mut T) {...}
```
Given a mutable reference to a box, functions may want to change
"which" object the Box is pointing at.
This change avoids recommending removing the "Box" parameter
for mutable references.
changelog: Don't trigger [`borrow_box`] lint on `&mut Box` references
Update the "borrow box" lint to avoid recommending the following
conversion:
```
// Old
pub fn f(&mut Box<T>) {...}
// New
pub fn f(&mut T) {...}
```
Given a mutable reference to a box, functions may want to change
"which" object the Box is pointing at.
This change avoids recommending removing the "Box" parameter
for mutable references.
add lint futures_not_send
changelog: add lint futures_not_send
fixes#5379
~Remark: one thing that can (should?) still be improved is to directly include the error message from the `Send` check so that the programmer stays in the flow. Currently, getting the actual error message requires a restructuring of the code to make the `Send` constraint explicit.~
It now shows all unmet constraints for allowing the Future to be Send.
Do not lint in macros for match lints
Don't lint in macros for match lints, more precisely in `check_pat` and `check_local` where it was not the case.
changelog: none
fixes: #5362
large_enum_variant: Report sizes of variants
This reports the sizes of the largest and second-largest variants.
Closes#5459
changelog: `large_enum_variant`: Report the sizes of the largest and second-largest variants.
Disallow bit-shifting in integer_arithmetic
Make the `integer_arithmetic` lint detect all the operations that are defined as being capable of overflow in the [Rust Reference](https://doc.rust-lang.org/reference/expressions/operator-expr.html#overflow), by also linting for bit-shifting operations (`<<`, `>>`).
changelog: Disallow bit-shifting in `integer_arithmetic`
Add lint on large non scalar const
This PR adds the new lint `non_scalar_const` that aims to warn against `const` declaration of large arrays. For performance, because of inlining, large arrays should be preferably declared as `static`.
Note: i made this one to warn on all const arrays, whether they are in a body function or not. I don't know if this is really necessary, i could just reduce this lint to variables out of function scope.
Fixes: #400
changelog: add new lint for large non-scalar types declared as const
Add lint for float in array comparison
Fixes#4277
changelog:
- Added new handler for expression of index kind (e.g. `arr[i]`). It returns a constant when both array and index are constant, or when the array is constant and all values are equal.
- Trigger float_cmp and float_cmp_const lint when comparing arrays. Allow for comparison when one of the arrays contains only zeros or infinities.
- Added appropriate tests for such cases.
Fixes#5405: redundant clone false positive with arrays
Check whether slice elements implement Copy before suggesting to drop
the clone method
changelog: add a check for slice indexing on redundant_clone lint
This change adds a check to the `inconsistent_digit_grouping` to add a check for
NumericLiterals that follow the UUID format of 8-4-4-4-12.
If the NumericLiteral matches the UUID format, no further inconsistent grouping checks
will be performed.
Closes#5431
Check for clone-on-copy in argument positions
Earlier if arguments to method calls matched the above pattern they were
not reported. This patch ensures such arguments are checked as well.
Fixes#5436
changelog: apply clone_on_copy lint to func args as well
Earlier if arguments to method calls matched the above pattern they were
not reported. This patch ensures such arguments are checked as well.
Fixes#5436
Downgrade implicit_hasher to pedantic
From the [documentation](https://rust-lang.github.io/rust-clippy/master/index.html#implicit_hasher), this lint is intended to suggest:
```diff
- pub fn foo(map: &mut HashMap<i32, i32>) { }
+ pub fn foo<S: BuildHasher>(map: &mut HashMap<i32, i32, S>) { }
```
I think this is pedantic. I get that this lint can benefit core libraries like serde, but that's exactly the use case for pedantic lints; a library like serde will [enable clippy_pedantic](fd6741f4b0/src/lib.rs (L304)) and take the time to go through everything possible. Similar for libraries doing a libz blitz style checkup before committing to a 1.0 release; it would make sense to run through all the available pedantic lints then.
But otherwise, for most codebases and certainly for industrial codebases, the above suggested change just makes the codebase more obtuse for questionable benefit.
changelog: Remove implicit_hasher from default set of enabled lints
Check fn header along with decl when suggesting to implement trait
When checking for functions that are potential candidates for trait
implementations check the function header to make sure modifiers like
asyncness, constness and safety match before triggering the lint.
Fixes#5413, #4290
changelog: check fn header along with decl for should_implement_trait
When checking for functions that are potential candidates for trait
implementations check the function header to make sure modifiers like
asyncness, constness and safety match before triggering the lint.
Fixes#5413, #4290
Downgrade unreadable_literal to pedantic
As motivated by #5418. This is the top most commonly suppressed Clippy style lint, which indicates that the community has decided they don't share Clippy's opinion on the best style of this.
I've left the lint in as pedantic, though it could be that "restriction" would be better -- I can see this lint being useful as an opt-in restriction in some codebases.
changelog: Remove unreadable_literal from default set of enabled lints
Add new lint for `Result<T, E>.map_or(None, Some(T))`
Fixes#5414
PR Checklist
---
- [x] Followed lint naming conventions (the name is a bit awkward, but it seems to conform)
- [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
`Result<T, E>` has an [`ok()`](https://doc.rust-lang.org/std/result/enum.Result.html#method.ok) method that adapts a `Result<T,E>` into an `Option<T>`.
It's possible to get around this adapter by writing `Result<T,E>.map_or(None, Some)`.
This lint is implemented as a new variant of the existing [`option_map_none` lint](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust-clippy/pull/2128)
Downgrade trivially_copy_pass_by_ref to pedantic
The rationale for this lint is documented as:
> In many calling conventions instances of structs will be passed through registers if they fit into two or less general purpose registers.
I think the purported performance benefits of clippy's recommendation are overstated. This isn't worth asking people to sprinkle code with more `*``*``&``*``&` to chase the alleged performance.
This should be a pedantic lint that is disabled by default and opted in if some specific performance sensitive codebase determines that it is worthwhile.
As a reminder, a typical place that a reference to a primitive would come up is if the function is used as a filter. Triggering a performance-oriented lint on this type of code is the definition of pedantic.
```rust
fn filter(_n: &i32) -> bool {
true
}
fn main() {
let v = vec![1, 2, 3];
v.iter().copied().filter(filter).for_each(drop);
}
```
```console
warning: this argument (4 byte) is passed by reference, but would be more efficient if passed by value (limit: 8 byte)
--> src/main.rs:1:15
|
1 | fn filter(_n: &i32) -> bool {
| ^^^^ help: consider passing by value instead: `i32`
```
changelog: Remove trivially_copy_pass_by_ref from default set of enabled lints
Downgrade let_unit_value to pedantic
Given that the false positive in #1502 is marked E-hard and I don't have much hope of it getting fixed, I think it would be wise to disable this lint by default. I have had to suppress this lint in every substantial codebase (\>100k line) I have worked in. Any time this lint is being triggered, it's always the false positive case.
The motivation for this lint is documented as:
> A unit value cannot usefully be used anywhere. So binding one is kind of pointless.
with this example:
> ```rust
> let x = {
> 1;
> };
> ```
Sure, but the author would find this out via an unused_variable warning or from `x` not being the type that they need further down. If there ends up being a type error on `x`, clippy's advice isn't going to help get the code compiling because it can only run if the code already compiles.
changelog: Remove let_unit_value from default set of enabled lints
Fix update_lints
This fixes a bug in update_lints, where `internal` lints were not registered properly. This also cleans up some code. For example: The code generation functions no longer filter the lints the are given. This is now the task of the caller. This way, it is more obvious in the `replace_in_file` calls which lints will be included in which part of a file.
This also turns the lint modules private. There is no need for them to be public, since shared code should be in the utils module anyway.
And last but not least, this fixes the `register_lints` code generation, so also internal lints get registered.
changelog: none
Result<T, E> has an `ok()` method that adapts a Result<T,E> into an Option<T>.
It's possible to get around this adapter by writing Result<T,E>.map_or(None, Some).
This lint is implemented as a new variant of the existing
[`option_map_none` lint](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust-clippy/pull/2128)
useless Rc<Rc<T>>, Rc<Box<T>>, Rc<&T>, Box<&T>
refers to #2394
changelog: Add lints for Rc<Rc<T>> and Rc<Box<T>> and Rc<&T>, Box<&T>
this is based on top of another change #5310 so probably should go after that one.
Downgrade option_option to pedantic
Based on a search of my work codebase (\>500k lines) for `Option<Option<`, it looks like a bunch of reasonable uses to me. The documented motivation for this lint is:
> an optional optional value is logically the same thing as an optional value but has an unneeded extra level of wrapping
which seems a bit bogus in practice. For example a typical usage would look like:
```rust
let mut host: Option<String> = None;
let mut port: Option<i32> = None;
let mut payload: Option<Option<String>> = None;
for each field {
match field.name {
"host" => host = Some(...),
"port" => port = Some(...),
"payload" => payload = Some(...), // can be null or string
_ => return error,
}
}
let host = host.ok_or(...)?;
let port = port.ok_or(...)?;
let payload = payload.ok_or(...)?;
do_thing(host, port, payload)
```
This lint seems to fit right in with the pedantic group; I don't think linting on occurrences of `Option<Option<T>>` by default is justified.
---
changelog: Remove option_option from default set of enabled lints
Lint unnamed address comparisons
Functions and vtables have an insignificant address. Attempts to compare such addresses will lead to very surprising behaviour. For example: addresses of different functions could compare equal; two trait object pointers representing the same object and the same type could be unequal.
Lint against unnamed address comparisons to avoid issues like those in rust-lang/rust#69757 and rust-lang/rust#54685.
changelog: New lints: [`fn_address_comparisons`] [#5294](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust-clippy/pull/5294), [`vtable_address_comparisons`] [#5294](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust-clippy/pull/5294)
`unused_self` false positive
fixes#5351
Remove the for loop in `unused_self` so that lint enabled for one method doesn't trigger on another method.
changelog: Fix false positive in `unused_self` around lint gates on impl items
Lint for `pub(crate)` items that are not crate visible due to the visibility of the module that contains them
changelog: Add `redundant_pub_crate` lint
Closes#5274.
Improvement: Don't show function body in needless_lifetimes
Changes the span on which the lint is reported to point to only the
function return type instead of the entire function body.
Fixes#5284
changelog: none
