FP: `needless_return_with_question_mark` with implicit Error Conversion
Return with a question mark was triggered in situations where the `?` desuraging was performing error conversion via `Into`/`From`.
The desugared `?` produces a match over an expression with type `std::ops::ControlFlow<B,C>` with `B:Result<Infallible, E:Error>` and `C:Result<_, E':Error>`, and the arms perform the conversion. The patch adds another check in the lint that checks that `E == E'`. If `E == E'`, then the `?` is indeed unnecessary.
changelog: False Positive: [`needless_return_with_question_mark`] when implicit Error Conversion occurs.
fixes: #11982
fix: incorrect suggestions generated by `manual_retain` lint
fixes#10393, fixes#11457, fixes#12081#10393: In the current implementation of `manual_retain`, if the argument to the closure is matched using tuple, they are all treated as the result of a call to `map.into_iter().filter(<f>)`. However, such tuple pattern matching can also occur in many different containers that stores tuples internally. The correct approach is to apply different lint policies depending on whether the receiver of `into_iter` is a map or not.
#11457 and #12081: In the current implementation of `manual_retain`, if the argument to the closure is `Binding`, the closure will be used directly in the `retain` method, which will result in incorrect suggestion because the first argument to the `retain` closure may be of a different type. In addition, if the argument to the closure is `Ref + Binding`, the lint will simply remove the `Ref` part and use the `Binding` part as the argument to the new closure, which will lead to bad suggestion for the same reason. The correct approach is to detect each of these cases and apply lint suggestions conservatively.
changelog: [`manual_retain`] refactor and add check for various patterns
Fix/Issue11932: assert* in multi-condition after unrolling will cause lint `nonminimal_bool` emit warning
fixes [Issue#11932](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust-clippy/issues/11932)
After `assert`, `assert_eq`, `assert_ne`, etc, assert family marcos unrolling in multi-condition expressions, lint `nonminimal_bool` will recognize whole expression as a entirety, analyze each simple condition expr of them, and check whether can simplify them.
But `assert` itself is a entirety to programmers, we don't need to lint on `assert`. This commit add check whether lint snippet contains `assert` when try to warning to an expression.
changelog: [`nonminimal_bool`] add check for condition expression
[`never_loop`]: recognize desugared `try` blocks
Fixes#12205
The old code assumed that only blocks with an explicit label can be jumped to (using `break`). This is mostly correct except for `try` desugaring, where the `?` operator is rewritten to a `break` to that block, even without a label on the block. `Block::targeted_by_break` is a little more accurate than just checking if a block has a label in that regard, so we should just use that instead
changelog: [`never_loop`]: avoid linting when `?` is used inside of a try block
Fixed FP in `redundant_closure_call` when closures are passed to macros
There are cases where the closure call is needed in some macros, this in particular occurs when the closure has parameters. To handle this case, we allow the lint when there are no parameters in the closure, or the closure is outside a macro invocation.
fixes: #11274#1553
changelog: FP: [`redundant_closure_call`] when closures with parameters are passed in macros.
Warn if an item coming from more recent version than MSRV is used
Part of https://github.com/rust-lang/rust-clippy/issues/6324.
~~Currently, the lint is not working for the simple reason that the `stable` attribute is not kept in dependencies. I'll send a PR to rustc to see if they'd be okay with keeping it.~~
EDIT: There was actually a `lookup_stability` function providing this information, so all good now!
cc `@epage`
changelog: create new [`incompatible_msrv`] lint
Avoid linting redundant closure when callee is marked `#[track_caller]`
Fixes#12199
Not sure if there's a nicer way to detect functions marked `#[track_caller]` other than by just looking at its attributes 🤔
changelog: [`redundant_closure`]: [`redundant_closure_for_method_calls`]: avoid linting closures where the function being called is marked `#[track_caller]`
Consolidating rustc Dependencies
changelog: none
For dependencies in rustc where there are multiple versions used, this moves the older dependency to the newer dependency. These are the updates to clippy as mentioned here: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/120177
Suggest existing configuration option if one is found
While working on/testing #12179, I made the mistake of using underscores instead of dashes for the field name in the clippy.toml file and ended up being confused for a few minutes until I found out what's wrong. With this change, clippy will suggest an existing field if there's one that's similar.
```
1 | allow_mixed_uninlined_format_args = true
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ help: perhaps you meant: `allow-mixed-uninlined-format-args`
```
(in hindsight, the current behavior of printing all the config options makes it obvious in most cases but I still think a suggestion like this would be nice to have)
I had to play around with the value a bit. A max distance of 5 seemed a bit too strong since it'd suggest changing `foobar` to `msrv`, which seemed odd, and 4 seemed just good enough to detect a typo of five underscores.
changelog: when an invalid field in clippy.toml is found, suggest the closest existing one if one is found
[`multiple_crate_versions`]: add a configuration option for allowed duplicate crates
Closes#12176
changelog: [`multiple_crate_versions`]: add a configuration option for allowed duplicate crates
respect `#[allow]` attributes in `single_call_fn` lint
Fixes#12182
If we delay linting to `check_crate_post`, we need to use `span_lint_hir_and_then`, since otherwise it would only respect those lint level attributes at the crate root.
<sub>... maybe we can have an internal lint for this somehow?</sub>
changelog: respect `#[allow]` attributes in `single_call_fn` lint
Don't emit `derive_partial_eq_without_eq` lint if the type has the `non_exhaustive` attribute
Part of https://github.com/rust-lang/rust-clippy/issues/9063.
If a type has a field/variant with the `#[non_exhaustive]` attribute or the type itself has it, then do no emit the `derive_partial_eq_without_eq` lint.
changelog: Don't emit `derive_partial_eq_without_eq` lint if the type has the `non_exhaustive` attribute
Pack u128 in the compiler to mitigate new alignment
This is based on #116672, adding a new `#[repr(packed(8))]` wrapper on `u128` to avoid changing any of the compiler's size assertions. This is needed in two places:
* `SwitchTargets`, otherwise its `SmallVec<[u128; 1]>` gets padded up to 32 bytes.
* `LitKind::Int`, so that entire `enum` can stay 24 bytes.
* This change definitely has far-reaching effects though, since it's public.
`unused_io_amount` captures `Ok(_)`s
Partial rewrite of `unused_io_amount` to lint over `Ok(_)` and `Ok(..)`.
Moved the check to `check_block` to simplify context checking for expressions and allow us to check only some expressions.
For match (expr, arms) we emit a lint for io ops used on `expr` when an arm is `Ok(_)|Ok(..)`. Also considers the cases when there are guards in the arms and `if let Ok(_) = ...` cases.
For `Ok(_)` and `Ok(..)` it emits a note indicating where the value is ignored.
changelog: False Negatives [`unused_io_amount`]: Extended `unused_io_amount` to catch `Ok(_)`s in `If let` and match exprs.
Closes#11713
r? `@giraffate`
Partial rewrite of `unused_io_account` to lint over Ok(_).
Moved the check to `check_block` to simplify context checking for
expressions and allow us to check only some expressions.
For match (expr, arms) we emit a lint for io ops used on `expr` when an
arm is `Ok(_)`. Also considers the cases when there are guards in the
arms. It also captures `if let Ok(_) = ...` cases.
For `Ok(_)` it emits a note indicating where the value is ignored.
changelog: False Negatives [`unused_io_amount`]: Extended
`unused_io_amount` to catch `Ok(_)`s in `If let` and match exprs.
Don't forget that the lifetime on hir types is `'tcx`
This PR just tracks the `'tcx` lifetime to wherever the original objects actually have that lifetime. This code is needed for https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/107606 (now #120131) so that `ast_ty_to_ty` can invoke `lit_to_const` on an argument passed to it. Currently the argument is `&hir::Ty<'_>`, but after this PR it is `&'tcx hir::Ty<'tcx>`.
no_effect_underscore_binding: _ prefixed variables can be used
Prefixing a variable with a `_` does not mean that it will not be used. If such a variable is used later, do not warn about the fact that its initialization does not have a side effect as this is fine.
changelog: [`no_effect_underscore_binding`]: warn only if variable is unused
Fix#12166
Add . to end of lint lists in configuration + Fix typo in pub_underscore_fields_behavior
Fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust-clippy/pull/10283#issuecomment-1890600381
In the "/// Lint: " list on each configuration option, you have to end with a dot. If the lint list doesn't have a dot, the configuration won't have documentation.
This PR adds those missing dots in some of the configuration, thus also adding their documentation.
changelog: Fix bug where a lot of config documentation wasn't showing.
changelog: Fix typo in `pub_underscore_fields_behavior` (`PublicallyExported` -> `PubliclyExported`)
Find function path references early in the same lint pass
This removes a visitor that existed to collect paths to functions in a context where the exact signature is required in order to cancel the lint.
E.g. when there's a `let _: fn(&mut i32) = path_to_fn_ref_mut_i32;` statement somewhere in the crate, we shouldn't suggest removing the mutable reference in the function signature.
It was doing a whole pass through the crate at the end, which seems unnecessary.
It seems like we should be able to add entries to the map in the same lint pass.
The map is untouched all the way until `check_crate_post` (at which point it will be populated by the visitor and finally checked), so it doesn't seem like this changes behavior: it will only be fully populated by the time we reach `check_crate_post` no matter what.
I don't think this will have a significant perf impact but it did show up in a profile with 0.5% for a crate I was looking into and looked like a low hanging fruit.
changelog: none
Prefixing a variable with a `_` does not mean that it will not be used.
If such a variable is used later, do not warn about the fact that its
initialization does not have a side effect as this is fine.
