new lint: `source_item_ordering`
changelog: [`source_item_ordering`]: Introduced a new restriction lint that checks the ordering of items in Modules, Enums, Structs, Impls and Traits.
From the written documentation:
> Why restrict this?
> Keeping a consistent ordering throughout the codebase helps with working as a team, and possibly improves maintainability of the codebase. The idea is that by defining a consistent and enforceable rule for how source files are structured, less time will be wasted during reviews on a topic that is (under most circumstances) not relevant to the logic implemented in the code. Sometimes this will be referred to as "bike-shedding".
>
> Keep in mind, that ordering source code alphabetically can lead to reduced performance in cases where the most commonly used enum variant isn't the first entry anymore, and similar optimizations that can reduce branch misses, cache locality and such. Either don't use this lint if that's relevant, or disable the lint in modules or items specifically where it matters. Other solutions can be to use profile guided optimization (PGO), or other advanced optimization methods.
I tried to build it as configurable as possible, as such a highly opinionated lint should be adjustable to personal opinions.
I'm open to any input and will be available both here and on the zulip for communication. In the meantime I'll be testing this lint against my own code-bases, which I've (manually) kept ordered with the default config, to see how well it works in practice.
And lastly, a big thanks to the community for making clippy the best linter there is!
This lint checks for code that looks like
```rust
let something : Vec<_> = (0..100).map(|_| {
1 + 2 + 3
}).collect();
```
which is more clear as
```rust
let something : Vec<_> = std::iter::repeat_with(|| {
1 + 2 + 3
}).take(100).collect();
```
or
```rust
let something : Vec<_> =
std::iter::repeat_n(1 + 2 + 3, 100)
.collect();
```
That is, a map over a range which does nothing with the parameter
passed to it is simply a function (or closure) being called `n`
times and could be more semantically expressed using `take`.
Add units/unit prefixes of frequency to doc-valid-idents
These units/unit prefixes often come up in the embedded world.
Should this PR also modify the `test_units` test? It seems only concerned with data units currently; should it also test frequency units?
changelog: [`doc_markdown`]: Add MHz, GHz, and THz to `doc-valid-idents`.
* Construct lint passes by taking `Conf` by reference.
* Use `HashSet` configs in less places
* Move some `check_crate` code into the pass constructor when possible.
* "AccessKit" is a commonly used accessibility toolkit used in Rust GUIs.
* "CoreFoundation", "CoreGraphics", "CoreText" are frameworks on Apple OSes.
* "Direct2D", "Direct3D", "DirectWrite" are frameworks on Windows
* "PostScript" is a programming language and is mentioned when talking about
text and vector graphics.
* "OpenAL" is an audio framework / API.
* "OpenType" is a font format (TrueType is already mentioned).
* "WebRTC", "WebSocket", "WebTransport" are web networking technologies.
* "NetBSD" and "OpenBSD" are like the already included FreeBSD.
The `restriction` group contains many lints which are not about
necessarily “bad” things, but style choices — perhaps even style choices
which contradict conventional Rust style — or are otherwise very
situational. This results in silly wording like “Why is this bad?
It isn't, but ...”, which I’ve seen confuse a newcomer at least once.
To improve this situation, this commit replaces the “Why is this bad?”
section heading with “Why restrict this?”, for most, but not all,
restriction lints. I left alone the ones whose placement in the
restriction group is more incidental.
In order to make this make sense, I had to remove the “It isn't, but”
texts from the contents of the sections. Sometimes further changes
were needed, or there were obvious fixes to make, and I went ahead
and made those changes without attempting to split them into another
commit, even though many of them are not strictly necessary for the
“Why restrict this?” project.
Modify lint pass note for consistency with the book
This PR:
- removes the note which appears when an early lint pass is created using `cargo dev new_lint`.
- adds a note that encourages contributors to use an early pass unless type information is needed if a late lint pass is created using `cargo dev new_lint`.
Late pass remains the default value if no pass is specified as most lints use late pass.
Closes#12595
changelog: none
This adds a `àllow-useless-vec-in-test` configuration which, when set
to `true` will allow the `useless_vec` lint in `#[test]` functions and
code within `#[cfg(test)]`. It also moves a `is_in_test` helper to
`clippy_utils`.
[`module_name_repetition`] Recognize common prepositions
Fixes#12544
changelog: [`module_name_repetition`]: don't report an item name if it consists only of a prefix from `allowed-prefixes` list and a module name (e.g. `AsFoo` in module `foo`). Prefixes allowed by default: [`to`, `from`, `into`, `as`, `try_into`, `try_from`]
Fixes#12544.
- don't report an item name if it consists only of a prefix from `allowed-prefixes` list and a module name (e.g. `AsFoo` in module `foo`).
- configured by `allowed-prefixes` config entry
- prefixes allowed by default: [`to`, `from`, `into`, `as`, `try_into`, `try_from`]
- update docs
new lint `legacy_numeric_constants`
Rework of #10997
- uses diagnostic items
- does not lint imports of the float modules (`use std::f32`)
- does not lint usage of float constants that look like `f32::MIN`
I chose to make the float changes because the following pattern is actually pretty useful
```rust
use std::f32;
let omega = freq * 2 * f32::consts::PI;
```
and the float modules are not TBD-deprecated like the integer modules.
Closes#10995
---
changelog: New lint [`legacy_numeric_constants`]
[#12312](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust-clippy/pull/12312)
RFC: Document Clippy's teams and team duties
First the big announcement:
**We want to add a new subteam for regular contributors to give them triage rights.**
---
This PR adds a new section to the book which describes the Clippy and Clippy-Contributor teams, with their duties and membership requirements. This is just an initial draft, that outlines what, I think, their responsibilities should be.
I hope everyone in the team is okay with me posting this directly to GitHub. I think a PR makes collaboration a bit easier.
[🖼️ Rendered 🖼️](https://github.com/xFrednet/rust-clippy/blob/add-team-docs/book/src/development/the_team.md)
---
Once we've decided on this document, I'll create a PR to add the new team on GitHub. As part of this, we'll also reach out to some active contributors, to ask if they would like to join the new team.
---
cc: `@rust-lang/clippy`
cc: #6627
changelog: none
r? `@flip1995`
Several (doc) comments were super outdated or didn't provide enough context.
Some doc comments shoved everything in a single paragraph without respecting
the fact that the first paragraph should be a single sentence because rustdoc
treats these as item descriptions / synopses on module pages.
