| Age | Commit message (Collapse) | Author | Lines |
|---|
|
|
|
this?”
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.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Add new lint `doc_lazy_continuation`
changelog: [`doc_lazy_continuation`]: add lint that warns on so-called "lazy paragraph continuations"
This is a follow-up for https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/121659, since most cases of unintended block quotes are lazy continuations. The lint is designed to be more generally useful than that, though, because it will also catch unintended list items and unintended block quotes that didn't coincidentally hit a pulldown-cmark bug.
The second commit is the result of running `cargo dev dogfood --fix`, and manually fixing anything that seems wrong. NOTE: this lint's suggestions should never change the parser's interpretation of the markdown, but in many cases, it seems that doc comments in clippy were written without regard for this feature of Markdown (which, I suppose, is why this lint should exist).
|
|
They can just be written as `use rustc_foo::bar`, which is far more
standard. (I didn't even know that a `crate::` prefix was valid.)
|
|
if immutbale -> lint delete redudant clone
if mutable -> lint check whether clone is needed
|
|
|
|
Fix `FormatArgs` storage when `-Zthreads` > 1
Fixes #11886
The initial way I thought of was a little gross so I never opened a PR for it, I thought of a nicer way today that no longer involves any `thread_local`s or `static`s
`rustc_data_strucutres::sync::{Lrc, OnceLock}` implement `DynSend` + `DynSync` so we can pass them to the lint passes that need the storage
changelog: none
r? `@flip1995`
|
|
clippy-subtree-update
|
|
|
|
Changelog for Clippy 1.78 :magic_wand:
Roses and Violets have colors,
Red and Blue are the two,
I'm getting to the end of my masters,
what a cool goal to pursue
---
### The cat of this release is: *Shadow* submitted by `@benwh1:`
<img height=500 src="https://github.com/rust-lang/rust-clippy/assets/32911992/c56af314-4644-482a-a08e-f32f4c7d7b22" alt="The cats of this Clippy release" />
Cats for the next release can be nominated in the comments :D
---
changelog: none
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
fix [`large_stack_arrays`] linting in `vec` macro
fixes: #12586
this PR also adds a wrapper function `matching_root_macro_call` to `clippy_utils::macros`, considering how often that same pattern appears in the codebase.
(I'm always very indecisive towards naming, so, if anyone have better idea of how that function should be named, feel free to suggest it)
---
changelog: fix [`large_stack_arrays`] linting in `vec` macro; add `matching_root_macro_call` to clippy_utils
|
|
Signed-off-by: forcedebug <forcedebug@outlook.com>
|
|
reduce `single_char_pattern` to only lint on ascii chars
This should mostly fix the `single_char_pattern` lint, because with a single byte, the optimizer will usually see through the char-to-string-expansion and single loop iteration. This fixes #11675 and #8111.
Update: As per the meeting on November 28th, 2023, we voted to also downgrade the lint to pedantic.
---
changelog: downgrade [`single_char_pattern`] to `pedantic`
|
|
clippy-subtree-update
|
|
|
|
|
|
`matching_root_macro_call` function in `clippy_utils`
|
|
Because that's the way it should be done.
|
|
fix: incorrect suggestions when `.then` and `.then_some` is used
fixes #11910
In the current implementation of `search_is_some`, if a `.is_none` call is followed by a `.then` or `.then_some` call, the generated `!` will incorrectly negate the values returned by the `then` and `.then_some` calls. To fix this, we need to add parentheses to the generated suggestions when appropriate.
changelog: [`search_is_some`]: add parenthesis to suggestions when appropriate
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
While they have many convenient APIs, it is better to expose dedicated functions for them
|
|
clippy-subtree-update
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Allow `filter_map_identity` when the closure is typed
This extends the `filter_map_identity` lint to support typed closures.
For untyped closures, we know that the program compiles, and therefore we can safely suggest using flatten.
For typed closures, they may participate in type resolution. In this case we use `Applicability::MaybeIncorrect`.
Details:
https://rust-lang.zulipchat.com/#narrow/stream/257328-clippy/topic/Should.20.60filter_map_identity.60.20lint.20when.20closures.20are.20typed.3F
changelog: `filter_map_identity` will now suggest using flatten for typed closures.
r? `@y21` && `@Centri3`
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
This extends the `filter_map_identity` lint to support typed closures.
For untyped closures, we know that the program compiles, and therefore
we can safely suggest using flatten.
For typed closures, they may participate in type resolution. In this case
we use `Applicability::MaybeIncorrect`.
Details:
https://rust-lang.zulipchat.com/#narrow/stream/257328-clippy/topic/Should.20.60filter_map_identity.60.20lint.20when.20closures.20are.20typed.3F
|
|
Rename `hir::Local` into `hir::LetStmt`
Follow-up of #122776.
As discussed on [zulip](https://rust-lang.zulipchat.com/#narrow/stream/131828-t-compiler/topic/Improve.20naming.20of.20.60ExprKind.3A.3ALet.60.3F).
I made this change into a separate PR because I'm less sure about this change as is. For example, we have `visit_local` and `LocalSource` items. Is it fine to keep these two as is (I supposed it is but I prefer to ask) or not? Having `Node::Local(LetStmt)` makes things more explicit but is it going too far?
r? ```@oli-obk```
|
