There was an error when trying to negate an expression
like `x - 1.0`. We used to format it as `-x - 1.0` whereas
a proper negation would be `-(x - 1.0)`.
Therefore, we add parentheses around the expression when it is a
Binary ExprKind.
We also add parentheses around multiply and divide expressions,
even though this is not strictly necessary.
This patch not only improves visibility, but also fixes a potential bug.
When a lint description ends with code block, the string will have three
backquotes at the end.
Since the current implementation prints the default value immediately
after that, the markdown renderer is unable to properly close the code
block.
Add size_of_ref lint
This addresses #9995, which is likely raising a valid point about `std::mem::size_of_val()`: It's [very easy to use double-references as the argument](https://github.com/apache/arrow-datafusion/pull/4371#discussion_r1032385224), which the function will happily accept and give back the size of _the reference_, not the size of the value _behind_ the reference. In the worst case, if the value matches the programmer's expectation, this seems to work, while in fact, everything will go horribly wrong e.g. on a different platform.
The size of a `&T` is independent of what `T` is, and people might want to use `std::mem::size_of_val()` to actually get the size of _any_ reference (e.g. via `&&()`). I would rather suggest that this is always bad behavior, though ([instead](https://doc.rust-lang.org/reference/type-layout.html#pointers-and-references-layout), [and](https://doc.rust-lang.org/stable/std/primitive.usize.html#associatedconstant.BITS)). I, therefore, put this lint into `correctness`.
Since the problem is usually easily fixed by removing extra `&`, I went light on suggesting code.
---
changelog: New lint: [`size_of_ref`]
[#10098](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust-clippy/pull/10098)
<!-- changelog_checked -->
Improve `possible_borrower`
This PR makes several improvements to `clippy_uitls::mir::possible_borrower`. These changes benefit both `needless_borrow` and `redundant clone`.
1. **Use the compiler's `MaybeStorageLive` analysis**
I could spot not functional differences between the one in the compiler and the one in Clippy's repository. So, I removed the latter in favor of the the former.
2. **Make `PossibleBorrower` a dataflow analysis instead of a visitor**
The main benefit of this change is that allows `possible_borrower` to take advantage of statements' relative locations, which is easier to do in an analysis than in a visitor.
This is easier to illustrate with an example, so consider this one:
```rust
fn foo(cx: &LateContext<'_>, lint: &'static Lint) {
cx.struct_span_lint(lint, rustc_span::Span::default(), "", |diag| diag.note(&String::new()));
// ^
}
```
We would like to flag the `&` pointed to by the `^` for removal. `foo`'s MIR begins like this:
```rust
fn span_lint::foo::{closure#0}(_1: [closure@$DIR/needless_borrow.rs:396:68: 396:74], _2: &mut rustc_errors::diagnostic_builder::DiagnosticBuilder<'_, ()>) -> &mut rustc_errors::diagnostic_builder::DiagnosticBuilder<'_, ()> {
debug diag => _2; // in scope 0 at $DIR/needless_borrow.rs:396:69: 396:73
let mut _0: &mut rustc_errors::diagnostic_builder::DiagnosticBuilder<'_, ()>; // return place in scope 0 at $DIR/needless_borrow.rs:396:75: 396:75
let mut _3: &mut rustc_errors::diagnostic_builder::DiagnosticBuilder<'_, ()>; // in scope 0 at $DIR/needless_borrow.rs:396:75: 396:100
let mut _4: &mut rustc_errors::diagnostic_builder::DiagnosticBuilder<'_, ()>; // in scope 0 at $DIR/needless_borrow.rs:396:75: 396:100
let mut _5: &std::string::String; // in scope 0 at $DIR/needless_borrow.rs:396:85: 396:99
let _6: std::string::String; // in scope 0 at $DIR/needless_borrow.rs:396:86: 396:99
bb0: {
StorageLive(_3); // scope 0 at $DIR/needless_borrow.rs:396:75: 396:100
StorageLive(_4); // scope 0 at $DIR/needless_borrow.rs:396:75: 396:100
_4 = &mut (*_2); // scope 0 at $DIR/needless_borrow.rs:396:75: 396:100
StorageLive(_5); // scope 0 at $DIR/needless_borrow.rs:396:85: 396:99
StorageLive(_6); // scope 0 at $DIR/needless_borrow.rs:396:86: 396:99
_6 = std::string::String::new() -> bb1; // scope 0 at $DIR/needless_borrow.rs:396:86: 396:99
// mir::Constant
// + span: $DIR/needless_borrow.rs:396:86: 396:97
// + literal: Const { ty: fn() -> std::string::String {std::string::String::new}, val: Value(<ZST>) }
}
bb1: {
_5 = &_6; // scope 0 at $DIR/needless_borrow.rs:396:85: 396:99
_3 = rustc_errors::diagnostic_builder::DiagnosticBuilder::<'_, ()>::note::<&std::string::String>(move _4, move _5) -> [return: bb2, unwind: bb4]; // scope 0 at $DIR/needless_borrow.rs:396:75: 396:100
// mir::Constant
// + span: $DIR/needless_borrow.rs:396:80: 396:84
// + literal: Const { ty: for<'a> fn(&'a mut rustc_errors::diagnostic_builder::DiagnosticBuilder<'_, ()>, &std::string::String) -> &'a mut rustc_errors::diagnostic_builder::DiagnosticBuilder<'_, ()> {rustc_errors::diagnostic_builder::DiagnosticBuilder::<'_, ()>::note::<&std::string::String>}, val: Value(<ZST>) }
}
```
The call to `diag.note` appears in `bb1` on the line beginning with `_3 =`. The `String` is owned by `_6`. So, in the call to `diag.note`, we would like to know whether there are any references to `_6` besides `_5`.
The old, visitor approach did not consider the relative locations of statements. So all borrows were treated the same, *even if they occurred after the location of interest*.
For example, before the `_3 = ...` call, the possible borrowers of `_6` would be just `_5`. But after the call, the possible borrowers would include `_2`, `_3`, and `_4`.
So, in a sense, the call from which we are try to remove the needless borrow is trying to prevent us from removing the needless borrow(!).
With an analysis, things do not get so muddled. We can determine the set of possible borrowers at any specific location, e.g., using a `ResultsCursor`.
3. **Change `only_borrowers` to `at_most_borrowers`**
`possible_borrowers` exposed a function `only_borrowers` that determined whether the borrowers of some local were *exactly* some set `S`. But, from what I can tell, this was overkill. For the lints that currently use `possible_borrower` (`needless_borrow` and `redundant_clone`), all we really want to know is whether there are borrowers *other than* those in `S`. (Put another way, we only care about the subset relation in one direction.) The new function `at_most_borrowers` takes this more tailored approach.
4. **Compute relations "on the fly" rather than using `transitive_relation`**
The visitor would compute and store the transitive closure of the possible borrower relation for an entire MIR body.
But with an analysis, there is effectively a different possible borrower relation at each location in the body. Computing and storing a transitive closure at each location would not be practical.
So the new approach is to compute the transitive closure on the fly, as needed. But the new approach might actually be more efficient, as I now explain.
In all current uses of `at_most_borrowers` (previously `only_borrowers`), the size of the set of borrowers `S` is at most 2. So you need only check at most three borrowers to determine whether the subset relation holds. That is, once you have found a third borrower, you can stop, since you know the relation cannot hold.
Note that `transitive_relation` is still used by `clippy_uitls::mir::possible_origin` (a kind of "subroutine" of `possible_borrower`).
cc: `@Jarcho`
---
changelog: [`needless_borrow`], [`redundant_clone`]: Now track references better and detect more cases
[#9701](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust-clippy/pull/9701)
<!-- changelog_checked -->
Avoid `match_wildcard_for_single_variants` on guarded wild matches
fix#9993
changelog: FP: [`match_wildcard_for_single_variants`]: No longer lints on wildcards with a guard
[#10056](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust-clippy/pull/10056)
<!-- changelog_checked -->
r? `@Jarcho`
Fix overflow ICE in large_stack/const_arrays
Change `maximum_allowed_size` config variable type from `u64` to `u128`, and converting total array sizes to `u128` to avoid overflow during multiplication.
Fixes#10044
changelog: Fix: [`large_const_arrays`] and [`large_stack_arrays`]: avoid integer overflow when calculating total array size
#10103
Null fn lints
Adds lints to check for code, that assumes nullable `fn()`.
### Lint examples:
`transmute_null_to_fn`:
```rust
error: transmuting a known null pointer into a function pointer
--> $DIR/transmute_null_to_fn.rs:9:23
|
LL | let _: fn() = std::mem::transmute(std::ptr::null::<()>());
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ this transmute results in undefined behavior
|
= help: try wrapping your function pointer type in `Option<T>` instead, and using `None` as a null pointer value
```
`fn_null_check`:
```rust
error: function pointer assumed to be nullable, even though it isn't
--> $DIR/fn_null_check.rs:13:8
|
LL | if (fn_ptr as *mut ()).is_null() {}
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
|
= help: try wrapping your function pointer type in `Option<T>` instead, and using `is_none` to check for null pointer value
```
Closes#1644
---
changelog: Improvement: [`transmuting_null`]: Now detects `const` pointers to all types
[#10099](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust-clippy/pull/10099)
changelog: New lint: [`transmute_null_to_fn`]
[#10099](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust-clippy/pull/10099)
changelog: New lint: [`fn_null_check`]
[#10099](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust-clippy/pull/10099)
<!-- changelog_checked (This is just a flag for me, please don't add it manually) -->
Identify more cases of useless `into_iter()` calls
changelog: Sugg: [`useless_conversion`]: Now suggests removing calls to `into_iter()` on an expression implementing `Iterator`
[#10020](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust-clippy/pull/10020)
<!-- changelog_checked -->
If the type of the result of a call to `IntoIterator::into_iter()`
and the type of the receiver are the same, then the receiver
implements `Iterator` and `into_iter()` is the identity function.
The call to `into_iter()` may be removed in all but two cases:
- If the receiver implements `Copy`, `into_iter()` will produce
a copy of the receiver and cannot be removed. For example,
`x.into_iter().next()` will not advance `x` while `x.next()` will.
- If the receiver is an immutable local variable and the call to
`into_iter()` appears in a larger expression, removing the call to
`into_iter()` might cause mutability issues. For example, if `x`
is an immutable local variable, `x.into_iter().next()` will
compile while `x.next()` will not as `next()` receives
`&mut self`.
Rustup
r? `@ghost`
I'm on the train and my internet is too bad to download the necessary toolchain, so I have to use CI to find sync fallout.
changelog: none
<!-- changelog_checked -->
