Add regression test for #11610 about mutable usage of argument in async function for the `needless_pass_by_ref_mut` lint
Fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust-clippy/issues/11610.
This was already fixed. I simply added a regression test.
changelog: Add regression test for #11610 about mutable usage of argument in async function for the `needless_pass_by_ref_mut` lint
Make `multiple_unsafe_ops_per_block` ignore await desugaring
The await desugaring contains two calls (`Poll::new_unchecked` and `get_context`) inside a single unsafe block. That violates the lint.
fixes#11312
changelog: [`multiple_unsafe_ops_per_block`]: fix false positives in `.await`
[`unnecessary_lazy_eval`]: reduce applicability if closure has return type annotation
Fixes#11672
We already check if closure parameters don't have type annotations and reduce the applicability to `MaybeIncorrect` if they do, since those help type inference and removing them breaks code. We didn't do this for return type annotations however. This PR adds it. This doesn't change it to produce a fix that will compile, but it will prevent rustfix from auto-applying it.
(In general I'm not sure if we can suggest a fix that will compile. In this specific example, it might be possible to suggest `&[] as &[u8]`, but as-casts won't always work, e.g. `Default::default() as &[u8]` is a compile error, so just reducing applicability should be a safe fix in any case for now)
changelog: [`unnecessary_lazy_eval`]: reduce applicability to `MaybeIncorrect` if closure has return type annotation
[`get_first`]: lint on non-primitive slices
Fixes#11594
I left the issue open for a couple days before making the PR to see if anyone has something to say, but it looks like there aren't any objections to removing this check that prevented linting on non-primitive slices, so here's the PR now.
There's a couple of instances in clippy itself where we now emit the lint. The actual relevant change is in the first commit and fixing the `.get(0)` instances in clippy itself is in the 2nd commit.
changelog: [`get_first`]: lint on non-primitive slices
Fix/11134
Fix#11134
Hir of `qpath` will be `TypeRelative(Ty { kind: Path(LangItem...` when a closure contains macro (e.g. https://github.com/rust-lang/rust-clippy/issues/11651) and #11134, it causes panic.
This PR avoids panicking and emitting incomplete path string when `qpath` contains `LangItem`.
changelog: none
`impl_trait_in_params` now supports impls and traits
Before this PR, the lint `impl_trait_in_params`. This PR gives the lint support for functions in impls and traits. (Also, some pretty heavy refactor)
fixes#11548
changelog:[`impl_trait_in_params`] now supports `impl` blocks and functions in traits
Improve `redundant_locals` help message
Fixes#11625
AFAIK, `span_lint_and_help` points the beginning of spans when we pass multiple spans to the second argument, so This PR I also modified its help span and its message.
lint result of the given example in the issue will be:
```console
error: redundant redefinition of a binding `apple`
--> src/main.rs:5:5
|
5 | let apple = apple;
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
|
help: `apple` is initially defined here
--> src/main.rs:4:9
|
4 | let apple = 42;
| ^^^^^
= help: for further information visit https://rust-lang.github.io/rust-clippy/master/index.html#redundant_locals
```
I hope that this change might help reduce user confusion, but I'd appreciate alternative suggestions:)
changelog: [`redundant_locals`]: Now points at the rebinding of the variable
Fix `items_after_test_module` for non root modules, add applicable suggestion
Fixes#11050Fixes#11153
changelog: [`items_after_test_module`]: Now suggests a machine-applicable suggestion.
changelog: [`items:after_test_module`]: Also lints for non root modules
std_instead_of_core: avoid lint inside of proc-macro
- fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust-clippy/issues/10198
note: The lint for the reported `thiserror::Error` has been suppressed by [Don't lint unstable moves in std_instead_of_core](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust-clippy/pull/9545/files#diff-2cb8a24429cf9d9898de901450d640115503a10454d692dddc6a073a299fbb7eR29) because `thiserror::Error` internally implements `std::error::Error for (derived struct)`.
changelog: [`std_intead_of_core`]: avoid linting inside proc-macro
I confirmed this change fixes the problem:
<details>
<summary>test result without the change</summary>
```console
error: used import from `std` instead of `core`
--> tests/ui/std_instead_of_core.rs:65:14
|
LL | #[derive(ImplStructWithStdDisplay)]
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
|
= note: this error originates in the derive macro `ImplStructWithStdDisplay` (in Nightly builds, run with -Z macro-backtrace for more info)
```
</details>
Move `needless_pass_by_ref_mut`: `suspicious` -> `nursery`
[Related to [this Zulip thread](https://rust-lang.zulipchat.com/#narrow/stream/257328-clippy/topic/needless_pass_by_ref_mut.20isn't.20ready.20for.20stable)]
`needless_pass_by_ref_mut` has been released with some important bugs (notably having a lot of reported false positives and an ICE). So it may not be really ready for being in stable until these problems are solved. This PR changes the lint's category from `suspicious` to `nursery`, just that.
changelog: none
Partially outline code inside the panic! macro
This outlines code inside the panic! macro in some cases. This is split out from https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/115562 to exclude changes to rustc.
There are cases where users create a unit variant for the purposes
of tracking the number of variants for an nonexhaustive enum.
We should check if an enum is explicitly marked as nonexhaustive
before reporting `manual_non_exhaustive` in these cases. Fixes#11583
new lint: `into_iter_without_iter`
Closes#9736 (part 2)
This implements the other lint that my earlier PR missed: given an `IntoIterator for &Type` impl, check that there exists an inherent `fn iter(&self)` method.
changelog: new lint: `into_iter_without_iter`
r? `@Jarcho` since you reviewed #11527 I figured it makes sense for you to review this as well?
[`manual_let_else`]: only omit block if span is from same ctxt
Fixes#11579.
The lint already had logic for omitting a block in `else` if a block is already present, however this didn't handle the case where the block is from a different expansion/syntax context. E.g.
```rs
macro_rules! panic_in_block {
() => { { panic!() } }
}
let _ = match Some(1) {
Some(v) => v,
_ => panic_in_block!()
};
```
It would see this in its expanded form as `_ => { panic!() }` and think it doesn't have to include a block in its suggestion because it is already there, however that's not true if it's from a different expansion like in this case.
changelog: [`manual_let_else`]: only omit block in suggestion if the block is from the same expansion
