use clippy_utils::diagnostics::span_lint_and_help; use clippy_utils::paths::INTO; use clippy_utils::{match_def_path, meets_msrv}; use if_chain::if_chain; use rustc_hir as hir; use rustc_lint::{LateContext, LateLintPass, LintContext}; use rustc_semver::RustcVersion; use rustc_session::{declare_tool_lint, impl_lint_pass}; const FROM_OVER_INTO_MSRV: RustcVersion = RustcVersion::new(1, 41, 0); declare_clippy_lint! { /// **What it does:** Searches for implementations of the `Into<..>` trait and suggests to implement `From<..>` instead. /// /// **Why is this bad?** According the std docs implementing `From<..>` is preferred since it gives you `Into<..>` for free where the reverse isn't true. /// /// **Known problems:** None. /// /// **Example:** /// /// ```rust /// struct StringWrapper(String); /// /// impl Into for String { /// fn into(self) -> StringWrapper { /// StringWrapper(self) /// } /// } /// ``` /// Use instead: /// ```rust /// struct StringWrapper(String); /// /// impl From for StringWrapper { /// fn from(s: String) -> StringWrapper { /// StringWrapper(s) /// } /// } /// ``` pub FROM_OVER_INTO, style, "Warns on implementations of `Into<..>` to use `From<..>`" } pub struct FromOverInto { msrv: Option, } impl FromOverInto { #[must_use] pub fn new(msrv: Option) -> Self { FromOverInto { msrv } } } impl_lint_pass!(FromOverInto => [FROM_OVER_INTO]); impl LateLintPass<'_> for FromOverInto { fn check_item(&mut self, cx: &LateContext<'tcx>, item: &'tcx hir::Item<'_>) { if !meets_msrv(self.msrv.as_ref(), &FROM_OVER_INTO_MSRV) { return; } if_chain! { if let hir::ItemKind::Impl{ .. } = &item.kind; if let Some(impl_trait_ref) = cx.tcx.impl_trait_ref(item.def_id); if match_def_path(cx, impl_trait_ref.def_id, &INTO); then { span_lint_and_help( cx, FROM_OVER_INTO, cx.tcx.sess.source_map().guess_head_span(item.span), "an implementation of `From` is preferred since it gives you `Into<_>` for free where the reverse isn't true", None, "consider to implement `From` instead", ); } } } extract_msrv_attr!(LateContext); }