fix `undocumented-unsafe-blocks` false positive
This fixes#9142 by iterating over the parent nodes as long as within a block, expression, statement, local, const or static.
---
changelog: none
Ensure new_ret_no_self is not fired if impl Trait<Self> is returned.
Fix#7344: ensure new_ret_no_self is not fired if `impl Trait<Self>` is returned.
changelog: [`new_ret_no_self`]: No longer lints when `impl Trait<Self>` is returned
[`use_self`] fix suggestion when full path to struct was given
Previously the following wrong suggestion was given
```rust
impl Error for std::fmt::Error {
fn custom<T: std::fmt::Display>(_msg: T) -> Self {
- std::fmt::Error // Should lint
+ Self::Error // Should lint
}
}
```
Also remove known problem line related to #4140 since it's been closed, and refactor the lint
changelog: [`use_self`] fix suggestion when full path to struct was given
`question_mark` don't lint on `if let Err` with `else`
cc #9518
AFAICT the only time this would be a valid suggestion is the rather esoteric
```rust
let _ = if let Err(e) = x {
return Err(e);
} else {
// no side effects
x.unwrap()
}
```
which doesn't seem worth checking to me. Please correct me if I'm missing something.
changelog: [`question_mark`] don't lint on `if let Err` with `else`
Previously the following wrong suggestion was given
```rust
impl Error for std::fmt::Error {
fn custom<T: std::fmt::Display>(_msg: T) -> Self {
- std::fmt::Error // Should lint
+ Self::Error // Should lint
}
}
```
Also remove known problem line related to #4140 since it's been closed, and refactor the lint
make ignored internally mutable types for `mutable-key` configurable
We had some false positives where people would create their own types that had interior mutability unrelated to hash/eq. This addition lets you configure this as e.g. `arc-like-types=["bytes::Bytes"]`
This fixes#5325 by allowing users to specify the types whose innards like `Arc` should be ignored (the generic types are still checked) for the sake of detecting inner mutability.
r? `@Alexendoo`
---
changelog: Allow configuring types to ignore internal mutability in `mutable-key`
Update `from_raw_with_void_ptr` to support types other than `Box`
This PR updates the `from_raw_with_void_ptr` lint, which covered
`Box::from_raw`, to also cover the `from_raw` static method of the
`Rc`, `Arc`, `alloc::rc::Weak` and `alloc::sync::Weak` types.
It also improves the description and error messages of this lint.
---
changelog: [`from_raw_with_void_ptr`]: Now works with the `Rc`, `Arc`, `alloc::rc::Weak` and `alloc::sync::Weak` types.
add new lint `seek_to_start_instead_of_rewind `
changelog: `seek_to_start_instead_of_rewind`: new lint to suggest using `rewind` instead of `seek` to start
Resolve#8600
We had some false positives where people would create their own types
that had interior mutability unrelated to hash/eq. This addition lets
you configure this as e.g. `arc-like-types=["bytes::Bytes"]`
Sometimes type annotations are needed for type inferrence to work,
or because of coercions. We don't know this, and we also don't
want users to possibly repeat the entire pattern.
This PR updates the `from_raw_with_void_ptr` lint, which covered
`Box::from_raw`, to also cover the `from_raw` static method of the
`Rc`, `Arc`, `alloc::rc::Weak` and `alloc::sync::Weak` types.
It also improves the description and error messages of this lint.
---
changelog: [`from_raw_with_void_ptr`]: Now works with the `Rc`, `Arc`, `alloc::rc::Weak` and `alloc::sync::Weak` types.
Improvement for `equatable_if_let`
fixes#9221
This PR makes sure that enums or structs not implementing `PartialEq` trait but still using the `if let` patterns can be linted to be rewritten with `matches!`.
If you added a new lint, here's a checklist for things that will be
checked during review or continuous integration.
- \[ ] Followed [lint naming conventions][lint_naming]
- \[x] Added passing UI tests (including committed `.stderr` file)
- \[x] `cargo test` passes locally
- \[ ] Executed `cargo dev update_lints`
- \[ ] Added lint documentation
- \[x] Run `cargo dev fmt`
---
changelog: Improve [`equatable_if_let`] with additional `matches!` suggestions.
fix: support `map_or` for `or_fun_call` lint
fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust-clippy/issues/8993
The methods defined in `KNOW_TYPES`, except for `map_or`, accepts only one argument, so the matching `if let [arg] = args` works only for these methods.
This PR adds `rest_arg` argument to `check_general_case` method and handling of cases with two arguments to support `map_or`.
changelog: `or_fun_call` support `map_or`
* add `rest_arg` to pass second argument from `map_or(U, F)`
* extract some procedures into closure
* add `rest_arg` to pass second argument from `map_or(U, F)`
* extract some procedures into closure
refac: rename rest_arg/second_arg
refac: organize function argument order
* put `second_arg` next to `arg` argument
Mark `let_underscore_lock` and `let_underscore_drop` as uplifted
Here I've renamed both the uplifted lints, however rustc's `let_underscore_lock` is slightly less capable than the clippy lint as it doesn't catch `parking_lot` types or `Result<Guard, ..>`, should we still remove it? The `Result` change looks like it was unintentional to me so that could probably be fixed upstream
changelog: Uplift [`let_underscore_drop`] to rustc https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/97739
changelog: Remove overlap between rustc's `let_underscore_lock` and Clippy's [`let_underscore_lock`]
r? `@flip1995`
[`unwrap_used`], [`expect_used`] do not lint in `test` cfg
changelog: [`unwrap_used`], [`expect_used`] do not lint in `test` cfg
fix https://github.com/rust-lang/rust-clippy/issues/9612
I've updated the doc and used `cfg` acronym, not sure if `conditional compiler flag` would have been better
fix `box-default` ignoring trait objects' types
This avoids removing the turbofish when the `Box` type is a `dyn` or `impl _`.
This fixes#9621.
---
changelog: none
Move MSRV tests into the lint specific test files
There are currently two ways MSRV tests are done in the ui test suite, adding a case to the `#![clippy::msrv = "1.0"]` `tests/ui/min_rust_version_attr.rs` or adding the two `msrv_1_xx` functions to the test file of the lint in question
This updates the clippy book to suggest the `msrv_1_xx` style, and replaces the tests in `tests/ui/min_rust_version_attr.rs` with ones of that style
Almost the entire diff is just moving stuff around as a result, I made sure to check the line numbers the lints are emitted at correspond with the right `msrv` case, so feel free to only skim that part
changelog: none
Add `unused_format_specs` lint
Currently catches two cases:
An empty precision specifier:
```rust
// the same as {}
println!("{:.}", x);
```
And using formatting specs on `format_args!()`:
```rust
// prints `x.`, not `x .`
println("{:5}.", format_args!("x"));
```
changelog: new lint: [`unused_format_specs`]
[`unnecessary_cast`] Do not lint negative hexadecimal literals when cast as floats
fix https://github.com/rust-lang/rust-clippy/issues/9603
changelog: [`unnecessary_cast`] Do not lint negative hexadecimal literals when cast as floats
[`zero_prefixed_literal`] Do not advise to use octal form if not possible
fix https://github.com/rust-lang/rust-clippy/issues/9651
changelog: [`zero_prefixed_literal`] Do not advise to use octal form if not possible
Add new lint `partial_pub_fields`
Signed-off-by: TennyZhuang <zty0826@gmail.com>
*Please write a short comment explaining your change (or "none" for internal only changes)*
changelog: `partial_pub_fields`: new lint to disallow partial fields of a struct be pub
Resolve#9604
Expand internal lint `unnecessary_def_path`
This PR does essentially two things:
* Separates the internal lints into modules by pass. (`internal_lints.rs` was over 1400 lines, which is a little unruly IMHO.)
* ~Adds a new~ Expands the `unnecessary_def_path` internal lint to flag hardcoded paths to diagnostic and language items.
My understanding is that the latter is currently done by reviewers. Automating this process should make things easier for both reviewers and contributors.
I could make the first bullet a separate PR, or remove it entirely, if desired.
changelog: Add internal lint `diagnostic_item_path`
Add a suggestion and a note about orphan rules for `from_over_into`
Adds a machine applicable suggestion to convert the `Into` impl into a `From` one to `from_over_into`
Also adds a note explaining that `impl From<Local> for Foreign` is fine if the `Into` type is foreign
Closes#7444
Addresses half of #9638
changelog: [`from_over_into`] Add a suggestion and a note about orphan rules
Fix edition revision ui tests
#9605 had me wondering how the edition revision tests were working for `manual_assert` but not for `@nyurik,` but it turns out `manual_assert`'s tests weren't working either. I checked how `rust-lang/rust` does it and apparently it comes down to whitespace, `//[rev] edition:X` works 😬
Removes the revisions from `match_wild_err_arm` as I couldn't find any edition dependant behaviour there
r? `@llogiq`
changelog: none
add tests in `implicit_saturating_sub` lint
This adds more tests to the `implicit_saturating_sub` lint to rule out certain false positives that have appeared in the past.
Now with those false positives out of the equation, we can move the lint to `style`.
---
changelog: promote [`implicit-saturating-sub`] to the `style` category
Fix to_string_in_format_args in parens
Fix suggestions like
```
print!("error: something failed at {}", (Location::caller().to_string()));
```
where the parenthesis enclose some portion of the value.
Fixes#9540
changelog: [`to_string_in_format_args`]: fix incorrect fix when value is enclosed in parenthesis
Fix suggestions like
```
print!("error: something failed at {}", (Location::caller().to_string()));
```
where the parenthesis enclose some portion of the value.
Don't suggest moving tuple structs with a significant drop to late evaluation
fixes#9608
changelog: Don't suggest moving tuple structs with a significant drop to late evaluation
Uplift `clippy::for_loops_over_fallibles` lint into rustc
This PR, as the title suggests, uplifts [`clippy::for_loops_over_fallibles`] lint into rustc. This lint warns for code like this:
```rust
for _ in Some(1) {}
for _ in Ok::<_, ()>(1) {}
```
i.e. directly iterating over `Option` and `Result` using `for` loop.
There are a number of suggestions that this PR adds (on top of what clippy suggested):
1. If the argument (? is there a better name for that expression) of a `for` loop is a `.next()` call, then we can suggest removing it (or rather replacing with `.by_ref()` to allow iterator being used later)
```rust
for _ in iter.next() {}
// turns into
for _ in iter.by_ref() {}
```
2. (otherwise) We can suggest using `while let`, this is useful for non-iterator, iterator-like things like [async] channels
```rust
for _ in rx.recv() {}
// turns into
while let Some(_) = rx.recv() {}
```
3. If the argument type is `Result<impl IntoIterator, _>` and the body has a `Result<_, _>` type, we can suggest using `?`
```rust
for _ in f() {}
// turns into
for _ in f()? {}
```
4. To preserve the original behavior and clear intent, we can suggest using `if let`
```rust
for _ in f() {}
// turns into
if let Some(_) = f() {}
```
(P.S. `Some` and `Ok` are interchangeable depending on the type)
I still feel that the lint wording/look is somewhat off, so I'll be happy to hear suggestions (on how to improve suggestions :D)!
Resolves#99272
[`clippy::for_loops_over_fallibles`]: https://rust-lang.github.io/rust-clippy/master/index.html#for_loops_over_fallibles
