This is useful for rust-lang/rust to allow setting a sysroot that's
*only* for build scripts, different from the regular sysroot passed in
RUSTFLAGS (since cargo doesn't apply RUSTFLAGS to build scripts or
proc-macros).
That said, the exact motivation is not particularly important: this
fixes a regression from
5907e9155e (r1060215684).
Note that only RUSTFLAGS is tested in the new integration test; passing
--sysroot through `clippy-driver` never worked as far as I can tell, and
no one is using it, so I didn't fix it here.
Allow implementing `Hash` with derived `PartialEq` (`derive_hash_xor_eq`
This is a common pattern and is totally allowed by the `Hash` trait.
Fixes#2627
changelog: Move: Renamed `derive_hash_xor_eq` to [`derived_hash_with_manual_eq`]
[#10184](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust-clippy/pull/10184)
changelog: Enhancement: [`derived_hash_with_manual_eq`]: Now allows `#[derive(PartialEq)]` with custom `Hash` implementations
[#10184](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust-clippy/pull/10184)
<!-- changelog_checked -->
trim paths in `suspicious_to_owned`
This continues my path trimming spree. I'm not going to add yet another changelog entry, we should have one "trim paths in some applicable lints" entry instead.
---
changelog: none
expl_impl_clone_on_copy: ignore packed structs with type/const params
changelog: [`expl_impl_clone_on_copy`]: Ignore `#[repr(packed)]` structs with type or const paramaters
Fixes#10188
A more involved solution that checks if any bound on the trait impl aren't present on the struct definition would be ideal, but I couldn't see a nice way to go about that
unused_self: Don't trigger if the method body contains todo!()
If the author is using todo!(), presumably they intend to use self at some point later, so we don't have a good basis to recommend factoring out to an associated function.
Fixes#10117.
---
changelog: Enhancement: [`unused_self`]: No longer lints, if the method body contains a `todo!()` call
[#10166](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust-clippy/pull/10166)
<!-- changelog_checked -->
[arithmetic_side_effects] Add more tests related to custom types
Add tests to ensure that custom types are triggered with any type of arithmetic operation as well as combinations with or without references.
---
changelog: none
<!-- changelog_checked -->
add a test against #10089
This was just an oversight while doing the box default path trimming PR, so I'm adding it rather late than never.
---
changelog: none
hotfix: remove `ITER_COUNT` since it is not called
`&paths:ITER_COUNT` is not being called from anywhere, so removing it doesn't seem to be a problem.
---
changelog: none
[#10167] Clarify that the lint only works if x eq. y in a `for` loop.
Reading the documentation for the lint, one could expect that the lint works in all cases that `X == Y`. This is false.
While the lint was updated, the documentation wasn't.
More information about the `N..N` problem in #5689 and #5628
---
Fixes#10167
changelog: [`reversed_empty_ranges`]: Update and clarify documentation
[arithmetic-side-effects] Consider negative numbers and add more tests
Same as #9867.
Opening again because it is not possible to randomly choose a reviewer in an ongoing PR like in the rust repo.
---
changelog: PF: [`arithmetic_side_effects`]: No longer lints on corner cases with negative number literals
[#9867](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust-clippy/pull/9867)
<!-- changelog_checked -->
Reading the documentation for the lint, one could expect that the lint works in all cases that `X == Y`. This is false.
While the lint was updated, the documentation wasn't.
More information about the `N..N` problem in #5689 and #5628
trim paths in `box_default`
This might help with #10089, though I have not tested that yet. In any event, it keeps the suggestion short and to the point.
---
changelog: Trim paths in [`box_default`] suggestion
trim paths in `default_trait_access`/`clone_on_copy` suggestions
This should help making the suggestions more palatable. Similar to #10153.
---
changelog: trim paths in [`default_trait_access`]/[`clone_on_copy`] suggestions
If the author is using todo!(), presumably they intend to use self at
some point later, so we don't have a good basis to recommend factoring
out to an associated function.
Fixes#10117.
changelog: Don't trigger [`unused_self`] if the method body contains a `todo!()` call
[`drop_ref`]: don't lint idiomatic in match arm
fixes#10122
As established in issue #9482, it is idiomatic to use a single `drop()` expression in a match arm to achieve a side-effect of a function while discarding its output. This should also apply to cases where the function returns a reference.
The change to the lint's code was less than 1 line, because all the heavy lifting was done in PR #9491.
---
changelog: FP: [`drop_ref`]: No longer lints idiomatic expression in `match` arms
[#10142](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust-clippy/pull/10142)
<!-- changelog_checked -->
Expand derivable-impls to cover enums with a default unit variant.
*Please write a short comment explaining your change (or "none" for internal only changes)*
changelog: [`derivable_impls`]: suggest deriving Default for enums with a default unit variant
Make the iter_kv_map lint handle ref/mut annotations.
For the degenerate (`map(|(k, _)| k)`/`map(|(_, v)| v)`) cases a mut annotation is superfluous and a ref annotation won't compile, so no additional handling is required. For cases where the `map` call must be preserved ref/mut annotations should also be presereved so that the map body continues to work as expected.
*Please write a short comment explaining your change (or "none" for internal only changes)*
changelog: [`iter_kv_map`]: handle ref/mut annotations
For the degenerate (`map(|(k, _)| k)`/`map(|(_, v)| v)`) cases a mut annotation is superfluous and a ref annotation won't compile, so no additional handling is required. For cases where the `map` call must be preserved ref/mut annotations should also be presereved so that the map body continues to work as expected.
chore: add simple comment for `get_enclosing_block`
I was reading the code of `clippy_utils/src/lib.rs` and thought that adding comment on `get_closing_block` would be helpful to first time visitor.
---
changelog: none
<!-- changelog_checked -->
