Change `if_same_then_else` to be a `style` lint
CC #3770
From https://github.com/rust-lang/rust-clippy/issues/3770#issuecomment-687565594 (`@flip1995):`
> Oh I thought I replied to this: I definitely see now that having this
> as a correctness lint might be the wrong categorization. What we might
> want to do is to just allow this lint, if there are comments in the
> arm bodies. But a good first step would be to downgrade this lint to
> style or complexity. I would vote for style since merging two arms is
> not always less complex.
changelog: [`if_same_then_else`]: Change to be a `style` lint
disallow calls to `LintContext::struct_span_lint` and `TyCtxt::struct_span_lint_hir`
`LintContext::struct_span_lint` and `TyCtxt::struct_span_lint_hir` don't show the link to the clippy documentation, see: #11805
In #11810, the last few calls to those methods were replaced with `span_lint_*`. It seems like we should just disallow them altogether so that no new code tries to use them.
The existing `disallowed_methods` lint makes this easy.
changelog: none
[`impl_trait_in_params`]: avoid ICE when function with `impl Trait` type has no parameters
Fixes#11803
If I'm reading the old code correctly, it was taking the span of the first parameter (without checking that it exists, which caused the ICE) and uses that to figure out where the generic parameter to insert should go (cc `@blyxyas` you wrote the lint, is that correct?).
This seemed equivalent to just `generics.span`, which doesn't require calculating the spans like that and simplifies it a fair bit
changelog: don't ICE when function has no parameters but generics have an `impl Trait` type
CC #3770
From https://github.com/rust-lang/rust-clippy/issues/3770#issuecomment-687565594 (@flip1995):
> Oh I thought I replied to this: I definitely see now that having this
> as a correctness lint might be the wrong categorization. What we might
> want to do is to just allow this lint, if there are comments in the
> arm bodies. But a good first step would be to downgrade this lint to
> style or complexity. I would vote for style since merging two arms is
> not always less complex.
Implement new lint `iter_over_hash_type`
Implements and fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust-clippy/issues/11788
This PR adds a new *restriction* lint `iter_over_hash_type` which prevents `Hash`-types (that is, `HashSet` and `HashMap`) from being used as the iterator in `for` loops.
The justification for this is because in `Hash`-based types, the ordering of items is not guaranteed and may vary between executions of the same program on the same hardware. In addition, it reduces readability due to the unclear iteration order.
The implementation of this lint also ensures the following:
- Calls to `HashMap::keys`, `HashMap::values`, and `HashSet::iter` are also denied when used in `for` loops,
- When this expression is used in procedural macros, it is not linted/denied.
changelog: add new `iter_over_hash_type` lint to prevent unordered iterations through hashed data structures
Don't check for late-bound vars, check for escaping bound vars
Fixes an assertion that didn't make sense. Many valid and well-formed types *have* late-bound vars (e.g. `for<'a> fn(&'a ())`), they just must not have *escaping* late-bound vars in order to be normalized correctly.
Addresses rust-lang/rust-clippy#11230, cc `@jyn514` and `@matthiaskrgr`
changelog: don't check for late-bound vars, check for escaping bound vars. Addresses rust-lang/rust-clippy#11230
Fixes to `manual_let_else`'s divergence check
A few changes to the divergence check in `manual_let_else` and moves it the implementation to `clippy_utils` since it's generally useful:
* Handle internal `break` and `continue` expressions.
e.g. The first loop is divergent, but the second is not.
```rust
{
loop {
break 'outer;
};
}
{
loop {
break;
};
}
```
* Match rust's definition of divergence which is defined via the type system.
e.g. The following is not considered divergent by rustc as the inner block has a result type of `()`:
```rust
{
'a: {
panic!();
break 'a;
};
}
```
* Handle when adding a single semicolon would make the expression divergent.
e.g. The following would be a divergent if a semicolon were added after the `if` expression:
```rust
{ if panic!() { 0 } else { 1 } }
```
changelog: None
Lint `needless_borrow` and `explicit_auto_deref` on most union field accesses
Changes both lints to follow rustc's rules around auto-deref through `ManuallyDrop` union fields rather than just bailing on union fields.
changelog: [`needless_borrow`] & [`explicit_auto_deref`]: Lint on most union field accesses
[`map_identity`]: respect match ergonomics
Fixes#11764
Note: the original tests before this were slightly wrong themselves already and had to be changed. They were calling `map` on an iterator of `&(i32, i32)`s, so this PR would stop linting there, but they were meant to test something else unrelated to binding modes, so I just changed them to remove the references so that it iterates over owned values and they all bind by value. This way they continue to test what they checked for before: the identity function for tuple patterns.
changelog: [`map_identity`]: respect match ergonomics
Disable `vec_box` when using different allocators
Fixes#7114
This PR disables the `vec_box` lint when the `Box` and `Vec` use different allocators (but not when they use the same - custom - allocator).
For example - `Vec<Box<i32, DummyAllocator>>` will disable the lint, and `Vec<Box<i32, DummyAllocator>, DummyAllocator>` will not disable the lint.
In addition, the applicability of this lint has been changed to `Unspecified` due to the automatic fixes potentially breaking code such as the following:
```rs
fn foo() -> Vec<Box<i32>> { // -> Vec<i32>
vec![Box::new(1)]
}
```
It should be noted that the `if_chain->let-chains` fix has also been applied to this lint, so the diff does contain many changes.
changelog: disable `vec_box` lint when using nonstandard allocators
Fix `dbg_macro` semi span calculation
`span_including_semi` was using a `BytePos` to index into a file's source which happened to work because the root file of the test started at `BytePos` 0, it didn't work for other files
changelog: none
new lint: `unnecessary_fallible_conversions`
Closes#11577
A new lint that looks for calls such as `i64::try_from(1i32)` and suggests `i64::from(1i32)`. See lint description (and linked issue) for more details for why.
There's a tiny bit of overlap with the `useless_conversion` lint, in that the other one warns `T::try_from(T)` (i.e., fallibly converting to the same type), so this lint ignores cases like `i32::try_from(1i32)` to avoid emitting two warnings for the same expression.
Also, funnily enough, with this one exception, this lint would warn on exactly every case in the `useless_conversion_try` ui test that `useless_conversion` didn't cover (but never two warnings at the same time), which is neat. I did add an `#![allow]` though since we don't want interleaved warnings from multiple lints in the same uitest.
changelog: new lint: `unnecessary_fallible_conversions`
fix enum_variant_names depending lint depending on order
changelog: [`enum_variant_names`]: fix single word variants preventing lint of later variant pre/postfixed with the enum name
fixes#11494
Single word variants prevented checking the `check_enum_start` and `check_enum_end` for being run on later variants
