add configuration for [`wildcard_imports`] to ignore certain imports
fixes: #11428
changelog: add configuration `ignored-wildcard-imports` for lint [`wildcard_imports`]
Fixed FP in `unused_io_amount` for Ok(lit), unrachable! and unwrap de…
…sugar
Fixes fp caused by linting on Ok(_) for all cases outside binding.
We introduce the following rules for match exprs.
- `panic!` and `unreachable!` are treated as consumed.
- `Ok( )` patterns outside `DotDot` and `Wild` are treated as consuming.
changelog: FP [`unused_io_amount`] when matching Ok(literal) or unreachable
fixes#12208
r? `@blyxyas`
We introduce the following rules for match exprs.
- `panic!` and `unreachable!` are treated as consumption.
- guard expressions in any arm imply consumption.
For match exprs:
- Lint only if exacrtly 2 non-consuming arms exist
- Lint only if one arm is an `Ok(_)` and the other is `Err(_)`
Added additional requirement that for a block return expression
that is a match, the source must be `Normal`.
changelog: FP [`unused_io_amount`] when matching Ok(literal)
Remove various `has_errors` or `err_count` uses
follow up to https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/119895
r? `@nnethercote` since you recently did something similar.
There are so many more of these, but I wanted to get a PR out instead of growing the commit list indefinitely. The commits all work on their own and can be reviewed commit by commit.
The query accept arbitrary DefIds, not just owner DefIds.
The return can be an `Option` because if there are no nodes, then it doesn't matter whether it's due to NonOwner or Phantom.
Also rename the query to `opt_hir_owner_nodes`.
Add regression ui test for #2371Fixes#2371.
#2371 seems to already be handled correctly in the lint. This PR adds a ui regression test so we can close it.
r? `@blyxyas`
changelog: Add regression ui test for #2371
[fix] [`redundant_closure_for_method_calls`] Suggest relative paths for local modules
Fixes#10854.
Currently, `redundant_closure_for_method_calls` suggest incorrect paths when a method defined on a struct within inline mod is referenced (see the description in the aforementioned issue for an example; also see [this playground link](https://play.rust-lang.org/?version=stable&mode=release&edition=2021&gist=f7d3c5b2663c9bd3ab7abdb0bd38ee43) for the current-version output for the test cases added in this PR). It will now try to construct a relative path path to the module and suggest it instead.
changelog: [`redundant_closure_for_method_calls`] Fix incorrect path suggestions for types within local modules
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
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
[`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.
Fix error warning span for issue12045
fixes [Issue#12045](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust-clippy/issues/12045)
In issue#12045, unexpected warning span occurs on attribute `#[derive(typed_builder::TypedBuilder)]`, actually the warning should underline `_lifetime`.
In the source code we can find that the original intend is to warning on `ident.span`, but in this case, `stmt.span` is unequal with `ident.span`. So, fix the nit here is fine.
Besides, `ident.span` have an accurate range than `stmt.span`.
changelog: [`no_effect_underscore_binding`]: correct warning span
fix FP on [`semicolon_if_nothing_returned`]
fixes: #12123
---
changelog: fix FP on [`semicolon_if_nothing_returned`] which suggesting adding semicolon after attr macro
Move async closure parameters into the resultant closure's future eagerly
Move async closure parameters into the closure's resultant future eagerly.
Before, we used to desugar `async |p1, p2, ..| { body }` as `|p1, p2, ..| { || async { body } }`. Now, we desugar the above like `|p1, p2, ..| { async move { let p1 = p1; let p2 = p2; ... body } }`. This mirrors the same desugaring that `async fn` does with its parameter types, and the compiler literally uses the same code via a shared helper function.
This removes the necessity for E0708, since now expressions like `async |x: i32| { x }` will not give you confusing borrow errors.
This does *not* fix the case where async closures have self-borrows. This will come with a general implementation of async closures, which is still in the works.
r? oli-obk
Fix [`multiple_crate_versions`] to correctly normalize package names to avoid missing the local one
Fixes#12145
changelog: [`multiple_crate_versions`]: correctly normalize package name
Correctly handle type relative in trait_duplication_in_bounds lint
Fixes#9961.
The generic bounds were not correctly checked and left out `QPath::TypeRelative`, making different bounds look the same and generating invalid errors (and fix).
r? `@blyxyas`
changelog: [`trait_duplication_in_bounds`]: Correctly handle type relative.
`read_zero_byte_vec` refactor for better heuristics
Fixes#9274
Previously, the implementation of `read_zero_byte_vec` only checks for the next statement after the vec init. This fails when there is a block with statements that are expanded and walked by the old visitor.
This PR refactors so that:
1. It checks if there is a `resize` on the vec
2. It works on blocks properly
e.g. This should properly lint now:
```
let mut v = Vec::new();
{
f.read(&mut v)?;
//~^ ERROR: reading zero byte data to `Vec`
}
```
changelog: [`read_zero_byte_vec`] Refactored for better heuristics
Add suspicious_open_options lint.
changelog: [`suspicious_open_options`]: Checks for the suspicious use of std::fs::OpenOptions::create() without an explicit OpenOptions::truncate().
create() alone will either create a new file or open an existing file. If the file already exists, it will be overwritten when written to, but the file will not be truncated by default. If less data is written to the file than it already contains, the remainder of the file will remain unchanged, and the end of the file will contain old data.
In most cases, one should either use `create_new` to ensure the file is created from scratch, or ensure `truncate` is called so that the truncation behaviour is explicit. `truncate(true)` will ensure the file is entirely overwritten with new data, whereas `truncate(false)` will explicitely keep the default behavior.
```rust
use std::fs::OpenOptions;
OpenOptions::new().create(true).truncate(true);
```
- [x] Followed [lint naming conventions][lint_naming]
- [x] Added passing UI tests (including committed `.stderr` file)
- [x] `cargo test` passes locally
- [x] Executed `cargo dev update_lints`
- [x] Added lint documentation
- [x] Run `cargo dev fmt`
Try to improve wording and fix dead link in description of arc_with_non_send_sync lint.
changelog: [`arc_with_non_send_sync`]: Improve wording and fix dead link.
Correctly suggest std or core path depending if this is a `no_std` crate
A few lints emit suggestions using `std` paths whether or not this is a `no_std` crate, which is an issue when running `rustfix` afterwards. So in case this is an item that is defined in both `std` and `core`, we need to check if the crate is `no_std` to emit the right path.
r? `@llogiq`
changelog: Correctly suggest std or core path depending if this is a `no_std` crate
- New ineffective_open_options had to be fixed.
- Now not raising an issue on missing `truncate` when `append(true)`
makes the intent clear.
- Try implementing more advanced tests for non-chained operations. Fail
Checks for the suspicious use of OpenOptions::create()
without an explicit OpenOptions::truncate().
create() alone will either create a new file or open an
existing file. If the file already exists, it will be
overwritten when written to, but the file will not be
truncated by default. If less data is written to the file
than it already contains, the remainder of the file will
remain unchanged, and the end of the file will contain old
data.
In most cases, one should either use `create_new` to ensure
the file is created from scratch, or ensure `truncate` is
called so that the truncation behaviour is explicit.
`truncate(true)` will ensure the file is entirely overwritten
with new data, whereas `truncate(false)` will explicitely
keep the default behavior.
```rust
use std::fs::OpenOptions;
OpenOptions::new().create(true).truncate(true);
```
[`useless_asref`]: check that the clone receiver is the parameter
Fixes#12135
There was no check for the receiver of the `clone` call in the map closure. This makes sure that it's a path to the parameter.
changelog: [`useless_asref`]: check that the clone receiver is the closure parameter
['arc_with_non_send_sync`] documentation edits
Arc's documentation uses the term "thread"; aligning to that terminology. Fix casing of "Rc".
changelog: None
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.
Fix false positive in `PartialEq` check in `unconditional_recursion` lint
Fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust-clippy/issues/12133.
We needed to check for the type of the previous element <del>in case it's a field</del>.
EDIT: After some extra thoughts, no need to check if it's a field, just if it's the same type as `Self`.
r? `@llogiq`
changelog: Fix false positive in `PartialEq` check in `unconditional_recursion` lint
Fix suggestion for `map_clone` lint on types implementing `Copy`
Follow-up of https://github.com/rust-lang/rust-clippy/pull/12104.
It was missing this check to suggest the correct method.
r? `@llogiq`
changelog: Fix suggestion for `map_clone` lint on types implementing `Copy`
One consequence is that errors returned by
`maybe_new_parser_from_source_str` now must be consumed, so a bunch of
places that previously ignored those errors now cancel them. (Most of
them explicitly dropped the errors before. I guess that was to indicate
"we are explicitly ignoring these", though I'm not 100% sure.)
fix/issue#11243: allow 3-digit-grouped binary in non_octal_unix_permissions
fixes [Issue#11243](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust-clippy/issues/11243)
Issue#11243 suggest lint `non_octal_unix_permissions` should not report binary format literal unix permissions as an error, and we think binary format is a good way to understand these permissions.
To solve this problem, we need to add check for binary literal, which is written in function `check_binary_unix_permissions` , only `binary, 3 groups and each group length equals to 3` is a legal format.
changelog: [`non_octal_unix_permissions`]: Add check for binary format literal unix permissions like 0b111_111_111
Fixed ICE introduced in #12004
Issue: in https://github.com/rust-lang/rust-clippy/pull/12004, we emit a lint for `filter(Option::is_some)`. If the
parent expression is a `.map` we don't emit that lint as there exists a
more specialized lint for that.
The ICE introduced in https://github.com/rust-lang/rust-clippy/pull/12004 is a consequence of the assumption that a
parent expression after a filter would be a method call with the filter
call being the receiver. However, it is entirely possible to have a
closure of the form
```
|| { vec![Some(1), None].into_iter().filter(Option::is_some) }
```
The previous implementation looked at the parent expression; namely the
closure, and tried to check the parameters by indexing [0] on an empty
list.
This commit is an overhaul of the lint with significantly more FP tests
and checks.
Impl details:
1. We verify that the filter method we are in is a proper trait method
to avoid FPs.
2. We check that the parent expression is not a map by checking whether
it exists; if is a trait method; and then a method call.
3. We check that we don't have comments in the span.
4. We verify that we are in an Iterator of Option and Result.
5. We check the contents of the filter.
1. For closures we peel it. If it is not a single expression, we don't
lint. We then try again by checking the peeled expression.
2. For paths, we do a typecheck to avoid FPs for types that impl
functions with the same names.
3. For calls, we verify the type, via the path, and that the param of
the closure is the single argument to the call.
4. For method calls we verify that the receiver is the parameter of
the closure. Since we handle single, non-block exprs, the
parameter can't be shadowed, so no FP.
This commit also adds additional FP tests.
Fixes: #12058
Adding `@xFrednet` as you've the most context for this as you reviewed it last time.
`@rustbot` r? `@xFrednet`
---
changelog: none
(Will be backported and therefore don't effect stable)
Issue: in #12004, we emit a lint for `filter(Option::is_some)`. If the
parent expression is a `.map` we don't emit that lint as there exists a
more specialized lint for that.
The ICE introduced in #12004 is a consequence of the assumption that a
parent expression after a filter would be a method call with the filter
call being the receiver. However, it is entirely possible to have a
closure of the form
```
|| { vec![Some(1), None].into_iter().filter(Option::is_some) }
```
The previous implementation looked at the parent expression; namely the
closure, and tried to check the parameters by indexing [0] on an empty
list.
This commit is an overhaul of the lint with significantly more FP tests
and checks.
Impl details:
1. We verify that the filter method we are in is a proper trait method
to avoid FPs.
2. We check that the parent expression is not a map by checking whether
it exists; if is a trait method; and then a method call.
3. We check that we don't have comments in the span.
4. We verify that we are in an Iterator of Option and Result.
5. We check the contents of the filter.
1. For closures we peel it. If it is not a single expression, we don't
lint.
2. For paths, we do a typecheck to avoid FPs for types that impl
functions with the same names.
3. For calls, we verify the type, via the path, and that the param of
the closure is the single argument to the call.
4. For method calls we verify that the receiver is the parameter of
the closure. Since we handle single, non-block exprs, the
parameter can't be shadowed, so no FP.
This commit also adds additional FP tests.
Handle "calls" inside the closure as well in `map_clone` lint
Follow-up of https://github.com/rust-lang/rust-clippy/pull/12104.
I just realized that I didn't handle the case where the `clone` method was made as a call and not a method call.
r? `@llogiq`
changelog: Handle "calls" inside the closure as well in `map_clone` lint
improve [`cast_sign_loss`], to skip warning on always positive expressions
fixes: #11642
changelog: improve [`cast_sign_loss`] to skip warning on always positive expressions
Turns out this is change became quite big, and I still can't cover all the cases, like method calls such as `POSITIVE_NUM.mul(POSITIVE_NUM)`, or `NEGATIVE_NUM.div(NEGATIVE_NUM)`... but well, if I do, I'm scared that this will goes forever, so I stopped, unless it needs to be done, lol.
Do not suggest `[T; n]` instead of `vec![T; n]` if `T` is not `Copy`
changelog: [`useless_vec`]: do not suggest replacing `&vec![T; N]` by `&[T; N]` if `T` is not `Copy`
Fix#11958
Extend `map_clone` lint to also work on non-explicit closures
I found it weird that this case was not handled by the current line so I added it. The only thing is that I don't see an obvious way to infer the current type to determine if it's copyable or not, so for now I always suggest `cloned` and I added a FIXME.
r? `@llogiq`
changelog: Extend `map_clone` lint to also work on non-explicit closures
rustc_span: Optimize syntax context comparisons
Including comparisons with root context.
- `eq_ctxt` doesn't require retrieving full `SpanData`, or taking the span interner lock twice.
- Checking `SyntaxContext` for "rootness" is cheaper than extracting a full outer `ExpnData` for it and checking *it* for rootness.
The internal lint for `eq_ctxt` is also tweaked to detect `a.ctxt() != b.ctxt()` in addition to `a.ctxt() == b.ctxt()`.
Fix scoping for let chains in match guards
If let guards were previously represented as a different type of guard in HIR and THIR. This meant that let chains in match guards were not handled correctly because they were treated exactly like normal guards.
- Remove `hir::Guard` and `thir::Guard`.
- Make the scoping different between normal guards and if let guards also check for let chains.
closes#118593
Don't emit `struct_field_names` lint if all fields are booleans and don't start with the type's name
Fixes#11936.
I only checked that all fields are booleans and not the prefix (nor the suffix) because when I started to list accepted prefixes (like "is", "has", "should", "could", etc), the list was starting to get a bit too long and I thought it was not really worth for such a small change.
r? `@llogiq`
changelog: Don't emit `struct_field_names` lint if all fields are booleans and don't start with the type's name
Don't lint `let_unit_value` when `()` is explicit
since these are explicitly written (and not the result of a function call or anything else), they should be allowed, as they are both useful in some cases described in #9048Fixes#9048
changelog: [`let_unit_value`]: Don't lint when `()` is explicit
