Change naive_bytecount applicability to MaybeIncorrect
We can't use `MachineApplicable` here as applying the fix will cause
another error because `bytecount` would first have to be added to the
Cargo.toml.
Example:
```
error: You appear to be counting bytes the naive way
--> $DIR/bytecount.rs:5:13
|
LL | let _ = x.iter().filter(|&&a| a == 0).count(); // naive byte count
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ help: Consider using the bytecount crate: `bytecount::count(x, 0)`
```
Just replacing it with the suggestion is not enough.
cc #3630
Change while_let_loop applicability to HasPlaceholders
The suggestion has been changed at some point to use `..` in the suggested code.
Due to that we can't make the lint MachineApplicable anymore.
cc #3630
This was causing two different ICEs in #3741.
The first was fixed in #3925.
The second one is fixed with this commit: We just don't `expect`
anymore. If the snippet doesn't contain an `else`, we stop emitting the
lint because it's not a suspiciously formatted else anyway.
Fix ICE in decimal_literal_representation lint
Handling the integer parsing properly instead of just unwrapping.
Note that the test is not catching the ICE because plain UI tests
[currently hide ICEs][compiletest_issue]. Once that issue is fixed, this
test would fail properly again.
Fixes#3891
[compiletest_issue]: https://github.com/laumann/compiletest-rs/issues/169
Handling the integer parsing properly instead of just unwrapping.
Note that the test is not catching the ICE because plain UI tests
[currently hide ICEs][compiletest_issue]. Once that issue is fixed, this
test would fail properly again.
[compiletest_issue]: https://github.com/laumann/compiletest-rs/issues/169
Fix `explicit_counter_loop` suggestion
#1670
This code seems to me to work, but I have two question.
* Because range expression desugared in hir, `Sugg::hir` doesn't add parenthesis to range expression. Which function is better to check range do you think, `check_for_loop_explicit_counter` or `hir_from_snippet`?
* Do you think we need to distinguish between range expression and struct expression that creates `std::ops::Range*`?
* Late Lint pass, catches:
* One liner: 0 -> null -> transmute
* One liner: std:null() -> transmute
* Const (which resolves to null) -> transmute
* UI Test case for Lint
* Updated test for issue 3849, because now the lint that code generated is in Clippy.
* Expanded `const.rs` miri-based Constant Folding code, to cover
raw pointers
Add `doc(include = ...)` detection to `missing_docs_in_private_items`
The whole `missing documentation in crate` part doesn't have any tests. If I should add test cases tell me.
Fix `boxed_local` suggestion
Don't warn about an argument that is moved into a closure.
ExprUseVisitor doesn't walk into nested bodies so use a new
visitor that collects the variables that are moved into closures.
Fixes#3739
Refactor: Cleanup one part of assign_ops lint
Removes a lot of indentation and separates lint emission from lint
logic. Only touches the `hir::ExprKind::AssignOp` part of the lint.
Refactor: Extract `trait_ref_of_method` function
This pattern was used in three places after #3844, so I think it's worth moving it into `utils/mod.rs` and documenting it.
* Ran automatic naming update
* Formalized rename of `cyclomatic_complexity` to `cognitive_complexity`
** Added the rename to `lib.rs`
** Added rename test
* Added warning for deprecated key `cyclomatic_complexity_threshold` and tests for it
* Added deprecation status for Clippy's builtin attribute
* Updated tests for new builtin attribute renaming
Fix `bool_comparison` with non-`bool` expressions
Fixes#3703.
It just moves around the type check that was already there for some comparison to all of them, because if one type isn't `bool`, none of those comparison can be simplified.
Fix ICE #3719+#3718 in lint match_ref_pats
Fixes#3719
This conveniently also fixes#3718
The ICE occurs when the match expression was a macro call, where the macro was defined in another file. Since we don't have the ability to reproduce this behavior with our UI tests (AFAIK), I couldn't add a test reproducing this ICE.. However, I added a test which is related to the ICE, to show the new behavior of the lint.
I tested it with the mscheme repo locally and the ICE didn't happen anymore.
r? @matthiaskrgr
Fix ICE #3747
I'm not sure if this was the correct approach.
I don't know if I put tests/ui/crashses/ice-3747.rs in correct place because the test always passed when I ran it with `cargo test`, even without the fix applied.
If I run that test with `env CLIPPY_TESTS=true cargo run --bin clippy-driver -- -L ./target/debug tests/ui/crashes/ice-3747.rs` then the test correctly fails without the fix applied
fixes#3747
Extract diagnostics module and document some functions
This moves the lint building functions from `utils/mod.rs` to their own
`utils/diagnostics.rs` file. Also adds documentation for three of them.
Make needless_range_loop not applicable to structures without iter method
Fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust-clippy/issues/3788
Now we will start lint indexed structure only if it has known iter or iter_mut method implemented.
Don't warn about an argument that is moved into a closure.
ExprUseVisitor doesn't walk into nested bodies so use a new
visitor that collects the variables that are moved into closures.
Fixes#3739
Don't check [print/write]_with_newline on raw strings
Some tests for #3778 and some maybe-not-the-greatest code that passes those tests!
I didn't run `fmt` because a) it doesn't seem to install on nightly for me, and b) on stable it wanted to apply formatting to over 90 files. Happy to make any tweaks though!
I suspect this contribution may require more than just tweaks. I'm still sort of new to rust so it may not be idiomatic, and the specific approach I took feels a little heavy-handed and brittle. I'm happy to make changes with some guidance, or equally happy if this gives a starting place for someone else to do it better :)
Add a lint to warn on `T: Drop` bounds
**What it does:** Checks for generics with `std::ops::Drop` as bounds.
**Why is this bad?** `Drop` bounds do not really accomplish anything.
A type may have compiler-generated drop glue without implementing the
`Drop` trait itself. The `Drop` trait also only has one method,
`Drop::drop`, and that function is by fiat not callable in user code.
So there is really no use case for using `Drop` in trait bounds.
**Known problems:** None.
**Example:**
```rust
fn foo<T: Drop>() {}
```
Fixes#3773
Both regular strings and raw strings can contain literal newlines. This commit
extends the lint to also warn about terminating strings with these.
Behaviour handling for raw strings is also moved into `check_newlines` by
passing in the `is_raw` boolean from `check_tts` as
[suggested](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust-clippy/pull/3781#pullrequestreview-204663732)
Pass tests for #3778, {print,write}_with_newline false positive
This change guards the lint from checking newlines with a sort of complicated
check to see if it's a raw string. Raw strings shouldn't be newline-checked,
since r"\n" is literally \-n, not a newline. I think it's ok not to check for
_literal_ newlines at the end of raw strings, but maybe that's debatable.
I... don't think this code is that great. I wanted to write the check after
`check_tts`, but that was too late -- raw string type info is lost (or I
couldn't find it). Putting it inside `check_tts` feels heavy-duty and the check
itself feels like a brittle reach possibly into places it shouldn't.
Maybe someone can fix this up :)
**What it does:** Checks for generics with `std::ops::Drop` as bounds.
**Why is this bad?** `Drop` bounds do not really accomplish anything.
A type may have compiler-generated drop glue without implementing the
`Drop` trait itself. The `Drop` trait also only has one method,
`Drop::drop`, and that function is by fiat not callable in user code.
So there is really no use case for using `Drop` in trait bounds.
**Known problems:** None.
**Example:**
```rust
fn foo<T: Drop>() {}
```
Fix ICE in needless_pass_by_value lint
If I understand it correctly, we were first creating a type with a
`RegionKind::ReErased` region and then deleted it again in
`util::implements_trait` with:
cx.tcx.erase_regions(&ty);
causing the type query to fail.
It looks like using `ReEmpty` works around that deletion.
Fixes#3144
Macro check for assertion_on_constants lint
The `assertion_on_constants` lint currently has following output for this code [Playground](https://play.rust-lang.org/?version=stable&mode=debug&edition=2018&gist=6f2c9df6fc50baf847212d3b5136ee97):
```rust
macro_rules! assert_const {
($len:expr) => {
assert!($len > 0);
}
}
fn main() {
assert_const!(3);
assert_const!(-1);
}
```
```
warning: assert!(const: true) will be optimized out by the compiler
--> src/main.rs:3:9
|
3 | assert!($len > 0);
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
...
8 | assert_const!(3);
| ---------------- in this macro invocation
|
= note: #[warn(clippy::assertions_on_constants)] on by default
= help: remove it
= help: for further information visit https://rust-lang.github.io/rust-clippy/master/index.html#assertions_on_constants
warning: assert!(const: false) should probably be replaced
--> src/main.rs:3:9
|
3 | assert!($len > 0);
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
...
9 | assert_const!(-1);
| ----------------- in this macro invocation
|
= help: use panic!() or unreachable!()
= help: for further information visit https://rust-lang.github.io/rust-clippy/master/index.html#assertions_on_constants
```
This is contradictory. This lint should not trigger if the `assert!` is in a macro itself.
Add a uitest subcommand to simplify UI test invocation
This makes running single tests a lot easier.
It's now
`TESTNAME=xxx cargo uitest`
instead of
`TESTNAME=xxx cargo test --test compile-test`
