validate lint name in `clippy_dev`
This PR adds a little bit of validation to `cargo dev new_lint`. I've had it happen a few times where I wanted to add a new lint, but forgot that lint names cannot contain `-`. If you try to do it anyway, `clippy_dev` will generate illegal syntax (like adding `mod test-lint;` to clippy_lints/src/lib.rs for the module declaration). Maybe having it error out early would be helpful to others too.
changelog: none
Add new lint `ptr_cast_constness`
This adds a new lint which functions as the opposite side of the coin to `ptr_as_ptr`. Rather than linting only as casts that don't change constness, this lints only constness; suggesting to use `pointer::cast_const` or `pointer::cast_mut` instead.
changelog: new lint [`ptr_cast_constness`]
needless_else: new lint to check for empty `else` clauses
Empty `else` clauses are useless. They happen in the wild and are not linted yet: https://github.com/uutils/coreutils/pull/4880/files
`else` clauses containing or preceded by comments are not linted as the comments might be important.
changelog: [`needless_else`]: new lint
Fix missing block for unsafe code
If a block is declared as unsafe, it needs an extra layer of curly braces around it.
Fixes#10808
This code adds handling for `UnsafeSource::UserProvided` block, i.e. `unsafe { ... }`. Note that we do not handle the `UnsafeSource::CompilerGenerated` as it seems to not be possible to generate that with the user code (?), or at least doesn't seem to be needed to be handled explicitly.
There is an issue with this code: it does not add an extra indentation for the unsafe blocks. I think this is a relatively minor concern for such an edge case, and should probably be done by a separate PR (fixing compile bug is more important than getting styling perfect especially when `rustfmt` will fix it anyway)
```rust
// original code
unsafe {
...
}
// code that is now generated by this PR
{ unsafe {
...
} }
// what we would ideally like to get
{
unsafe {
...
}
}
```
changelog: [`single_match`](https://rust-lang.github.io/rust-clippy/master/#single_match): Fix suggestion for `unsafe` blocks
[`large_stack_arrays`]: check array initializer expressions
Fixes#10741.
Prior to this PR, the lint only checked array repeat expressions (ie. `[T; n]`). Now it also checks array initializer expressions.
changelog: [`large_stack_arrays`]: check array initializer expressions
[`match_wild_err_arm`]: do not lint in const contexts
Fixes#10635.
changelog: [`match_wild_err_arm`]: do not lint in const contexts as `Result::{unwrap, expect}` is not const-stable
These unit tests generate non-compilable code. I did NOT `bless` them on purpose because the stderr output is not good.
I'm surprised we don't auto-compile the suggestions here - is this something that can be easily enabled?
See #10808
Update URLs in Type Checking chapter
Updated links to `Adt`, `pat_ty` and `Tykind` in the "Type Checking" chapter of the book.
### Notes:
- For discussion about the whole project, please use the tracking issue for the project #10597 (It also contains a timeline, discussions, and more information).
changelog: Fix broken links in "Type Checking" chapter of the book
Add `MINIMAL_CFG_CONDITION` lint
I encountered a few cases where some code had:
```rust
#[cfg(any(unix))]
```
In this case, the `any` is useless. This lint checks this and also for the `all` condition.
```
changelog: [`unique_cfg_condition`]: Add new `UNIQUE_CFG_CONDITION` lint
```
Enhance `needless_collect`: lint in method/function arguments that take an `IntoIterator`
Updates `needless_collect` to also lint `collect` calls in method/function arguments that take an `IntoIterator` (for example `Extend::extend`). Every `Iterator` trivially implements `IntoIterator` and collecting it only causes an unnecessary allocation.
---
changelog: Enhancement: [`needless_collect`]: Now also detects function arguments, taking a generic `IntoIterator`
[#10777](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust-clippy/pull/10777)
<!-- changelog_checked -->
fixes#10762
`SpanlessEq` improvements
fixes#9775
Also includes a simplification to `consts::constant`'s interface since I was already touching the code.
At the start of `eq_expr` the check:
```rust
if !self.inner.allow_side_effects && left.span.ctxt() != right.span.ctxt() {
return false;
}
```
was removed. This was added in 49e2501 to handle `cfg` macros. This is better handled by the newly added `check_ctxt`.
changelog: [various lints]: Don't consider different `cfg!` expansions to be the same unless they are for the same config.
changelog: [various lints]: Don't consider the expansion of two different macros to be equal, even when they expand to the same token sequence.
changelog: [various lints]: Don't consider two blocks to be equal if they contain disabled code or empty macro expansions, unless those section contain the exact same token sequence.
* Don't consider expansions of different macros to be the same, even if they expand to the same tokens
* Don't consider `cfg!` expansions to be equal if they check different configs.
Rename `integer_arithmetic`
The lack of official feedback in #10200 made me give up on pursuing the matter but after yet another use-case that is not handled by `integer_arithmetic` (#10615), I think it is worth trying again.
---
changelog: Move/Deprecation: Rename `integer_arithmetic` to `arithmetic_side_effects`
[#10674](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust-clippy/pull/10674)
<!-- changelog_checked -->
don't remove `dbg!` in arbitrary expressions
Fixes#9914
The `dbg_macro` lint replaces empty `dbg!` invocations with the empty string in its suggestion, which is not always valid code in certain contexts (e.g. `let _ = dbg!();` becomes `let _ = ;`). This PR changes it to `()`, which should always be valid where `dbg!()` is valid (`dbg!()` with no arguments evaluates to `()`).
It also special-cases "standalone" `dbg!();` expression statements, where it will suggest removing the whole statement entirely like it did before.
changelog: [`dbg_macro`]: don't remove `dbg!()` in arbitrary expressions as it sometimes results in syntax errors
Remove unnecessary `clone` from `needless_collect` example
The example for [clippy::needless_collect](https://rust-lang.github.io/rust-clippy/master/#needless_collect) is written as follows:
```rust
let len = iterator.clone().collect::<Vec<_>>().len();
// should be
let len = iterator.count();
```
With this change, the unnecessary `clone()` is removed and the the standard
### Example
```rust
// original
```
Use instead:
```rust
// improved
```
structure is followed.
Discussion: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust-clippy/discussions/10784#discussion-5198885
changelog: [`needless_collect`]: Cleaned up the example in the lint documentation.
fix [`invalid_regex`] not recognizing new syntax introduced after regex-1.8.0
fixes: #10680
---
changelog: fix [`invalid_regex`] not recognizing new syntax introduced after regex-1.8.0
bump up `regex-syntax` dependency version to 0.7.0
Fix: Some suggestions generated by the option_if_let_else lint did not compile
This addresses a bug in Clippy where the fix suggestend by the `option_if_let_else` lint would not compile for `Result`s which have an impure expression in the `else` branch.
---
changelog: [`option_if_let_else`]: Fixed incorrect suggestion for `Result`s
[#10337](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust-clippy/pull/10337)
<!-- changelog_checked -->
Fixes#10335.
