Hex bin digit grouping
This revives and updates an old pr (#3391) for the current API.
Closes#2538.
---
*Please keep the line below*
changelog: Add [`unusual_byte_groupings`] lint.
Split out statement attributes changes from #78306
This is the same as PR https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/78306, but `unused_doc_comments` is modified to explicitly ignore statement items (which preserves the current behavior).
This shouldn't have any user-visible effects, so it can be landed without lang team discussion.
---------
When the 'early' and 'late' visitors visit an attribute target, they
activate any lint attributes (e.g. `#[allow]`) that apply to it.
This can affect warnings emitted on sibiling attributes. For example,
the following code does not produce an `unused_attributes` for
`#[inline]`, since the sibiling `#[allow(unused_attributes)]` suppressed
the warning.
```rust
trait Foo {
#[allow(unused_attributes)] #[inline] fn first();
#[inline] #[allow(unused_attributes)] fn second();
}
```
However, we do not do this for statements - instead, the lint attributes
only become active when we visit the struct nested inside `StmtKind`
(e.g. `Item`).
Currently, this is difficult to observe due to another issue - the
`HasAttrs` impl for `StmtKind` ignores attributes for `StmtKind::Item`.
As a result, the `unused_doc_comments` lint will never see attributes on
item statements.
This commit makes two interrelated fixes to the handling of inert
(non-proc-macro) attributes on statements:
* The `HasAttr` impl for `StmtKind` now returns attributes for
`StmtKind::Item`, treating it just like every other `StmtKind`
variant. The only place relying on the old behavior was macro
which has been updated to explicitly ignore attributes on item
statements. This allows the `unused_doc_comments` lint to fire for
item statements.
* The `early` and `late` lint visitors now activate lint attributes when
invoking the callback for `Stmt`. This ensures that a lint
attribute (e.g. `#[allow(unused_doc_comments)]`) can be applied to
sibiling attributes on an item statement.
For now, the `unused_doc_comments` lint is explicitly disabled on item
statements, which preserves the current behavior. The exact locatiosn
where this lint should fire are being discussed in PR #78306
Add lint for holding RefCell Ref across an await
Fixes#6008
This introduces the lint await_holding_refcell_ref. For async functions, we iterate
over all types in generator_interior_types and look for `core::cell::Ref` or `core::cell::RefMut`. If we find one then we emit a lint.
Heavily cribs from: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust-clippy/pull/5439
changelog: introduce the await_holding_refcell_ref lint
Refactor trivially_copy_pass_by_ref and the new lint into pass_by_ref_or_value module
Update stderr of conf_unknown_key test
Rename lint to large_types_passed_by_value
Increase `pass_by_value_size_limit` default value to 256
Improve rules for `large_types_passed_by_value`
Improve tests for `large_types_passed_by_value`
Improve documentation for `large_types_passed_by_value`
Make minor corrections to pass_by_ref_or_value.rs suggested by clippy itself
Fix `large_types_passed_by_value` example and improve docs
pass_by_ref_or_value: Tweak check for mut annotation in params
large_types_passed_by_value: add tests for pub trait, trait impl and inline attributes
When the 'early' and 'late' visitors visit an attribute target, they
activate any lint attributes (e.g. `#[allow]`) that apply to it.
This can affect warnings emitted on sibiling attributes. For example,
the following code does not produce an `unused_attributes` for
`#[inline]`, since the sibiling `#[allow(unused_attributes)]` suppressed
the warning.
```rust
trait Foo {
#[allow(unused_attributes)] #[inline] fn first();
#[inline] #[allow(unused_attributes)] fn second();
}
```
However, we do not do this for statements - instead, the lint attributes
only become active when we visit the struct nested inside `StmtKind`
(e.g. `Item`).
Currently, this is difficult to observe due to another issue - the
`HasAttrs` impl for `StmtKind` ignores attributes for `StmtKind::Item`.
As a result, the `unused_doc_comments` lint will never see attributes on
item statements.
This commit makes two interrelated fixes to the handling of inert
(non-proc-macro) attributes on statements:
* The `HasAttr` impl for `StmtKind` now returns attributes for
`StmtKind::Item`, treating it just like every other `StmtKind`
variant. The only place relying on the old behavior was macro
which has been updated to explicitly ignore attributes on item
statements. This allows the `unused_doc_comments` lint to fire for
item statements.
* The `early` and `late` lint visitors now activate lint attributes when
invoking the callback for `Stmt`. This ensures that a lint
attribute (e.g. `#[allow(unused_doc_comments)]`) can be applied to
sibiling attributes on an item statement.
For now, the `unused_doc_comments` lint is explicitly disabled on item
statements, which preserves the current behavior. The exact locatiosn
where this lint should fire are being discussed in PR #78306
Identical arguments on assert macro family
Lint when identical args are used on `assert_eq!`, `debug_assert_eq!`, `assert_ne!` and `debug_assert_ne!` macros.
Added to the lint `eq_op`.
Common functions added to `utils/higher.rs`
Fixes: #3574Fixes: #4694
changelog: Lint on identical args when calling `assert_eq!`, `debug_assert_eq!`, `assert_ne!` and `debug_assert_ne!` macros
BTreeMap: refactor Entry out of map.rs into its own file
btree/map.rs is approaching the 3000 line mark, splitting out the entry
code buys about 500 lines of headroom.
I've created this PR because the changes I've made in #77438 will push `map.rs` over the 3000 line limit and cause tidy to complain.
I picked `Entry` to factor out because it feels less tightly coupled to the rest of `BTreeMap` than the various iterator implementations.
Related: #60302
Expands `manual_memcpy` to lint ones with loop counters
Closes#1670
This PR expands `manual_memcpy` to lint ones with loop counters as described in https://github.com/rust-lang/rust-clippy/issues/1670#issuecomment-293280204
Although the current code is working, I have a couple of questions and concerns.
~~Firstly, I manually implemented `Clone` for `Sugg` because `AssocOp` lacks `Clone`. As `AssocOp` only holds an enum, which is `Copy`, as a value, it seems `AssocOp` can be `Clone`; but, I was not sure where to ask it. Should I make a PR to `rustc`?~~ The [PR]( https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/73629) was made.
Secondly, manual copying with loop counters are likely to trigger `needless_range_loop` and `explicit_counter_loop` along with `manual_memcpy`; in fact, I explicitly allowed them in the tests. Is there any way to disable these two lints when a code triggers `manual_memcpy`?
And, another thing I'd like to note is that `Sugg` adds unnecessary parentheses when expressions with parentheses passed to its `hir` function, as seen here:
```
error: it looks like you're manually copying between slices
--> $DIR/manual_memcpy.rs:145:14
|
LL | for i in 3..(3 + src.len()) {
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ help: try replacing the loop by: `dst[3..((3 + src.len()))].clone_from_slice(&src[..((3 + src.len()) - 3)])
```
However, using the `hir` function is needed to prevent the suggestion causing errors when users use bitwise operations; and also this have already existed, for example: `verbose_bit_mask`. Thus, I think this is fine.
changelog: Expands `manual_memcpy` to lint ones with loop counters
