This splits up clippy::collapsible_if into collapsible_if for
if x {
if y { }
}
=>
if x && y { }
and collapsible_else_if for
if x {
} else {
if y { }
}
=>
if x {
} else if y {
}
so that we can lint for only the latter but not the first if we desire.
changelog: collapsible_if: split up linting for if x {} else { if y {} } into collapsible_else_if lint
Ensure `Copy` exception in trait definition for `wrong_self_conventio…
Add a test case to ensure `Copy` exception is preserved also in trait definition, when passing `self` by value.
Follow up of #6316
changelog: none
Reassign default private
changelog: fix field_reassign_with_default false positive
* Fix#6344
* Fix assumption that `field: Default::default()` is the same as `..Default::default()`
* Cleanup some redundant logic
Added from_over_into lint
Closes#6456
Added a lint that searches for implementations of `Into<..>` and suggests to implement `From<..>` instead, as it comes with a default implementation of `Into`. Category: style.
changelog: added `from_over_into` lint
Lint also in trait def for `wrong_self_convention`
Extends `wrong_self_convention` to lint also in trait definition.
By the way, I think the `wrong_pub_self_convention` [example](dd826b4626/clippy_lints/src/methods/mod.rs (L197)) is misleading.
On [playground](https://play.rust-lang.org/?version=stable&mode=debug&edition=2018&gist=32615ab3f6009e7e42cc3754be0ca17f), it fires `wrong_self_convention`, so the example (or the lint maybe?) needs to be reworked.
The difference with `wrong_self_convention` [example](dd826b4626/clippy_lints/src/methods/mod.rs (L172)) is mainly the `pub` keyword on the method `as_str`, but the lint doesn't use the function visibility as condition to choose which lint to fire (in fact it uses the visibility of the impl item).
fixes: #6307
changelog: Lint `wrong_self_convention` lint in trait def also
needless_doctest_main: handle correctly parse errors
Before this change, finding an error when parsing a doctest would make Clippy exit without emitting an error. Now we properly catch a fatal error and ignore it.
Also, if a doctest specifies an edition in the info line, it will be used when parsing it.
changelog: needless_doctest_main: handle correctly parse errors
Fixes#6022
make MIR graphviz generation use gsgdt
gsgdt [https://crates.io/crates/gsgdt] is a crate which provides an
interface for stringly typed graphs. It also provides generation of
graphviz dot format from said graph.
This is the first in a series of PRs on moving graphviz code out of rustc into normal crates and then implementating graph diffing on top of these crates.
r? `@oli-obk`
Fixing a false positive for the `match_single_binding` lint #5552
This is a fix for a false positive in the `match_single_binding` lint when using `#[cfg()]` on a branch. It is sadly a bit hacky but maybe the best solution as rust removes the other branch from the AST before we can even validate it. This fix looks at the code snippet itself and returns if it includes another thick arrow `=>` besides the one matching arm we found. This can again cause false negatives if someone has the following code:
```rust
match x {
// => <-- Causes a false negative
_ => 1,
}
```
I thought about making the code more complex and maybe validating against other things like the `#[cfg()]` macro but I believe that this is the best solution. This has basically switched the issue from a false positive to a false negative in a very specific case.
I'm happy to make some changes if you have any suggestions 🙃.
---
Fixes#5552
changelog: Fixed a false positive in the `match_single_binding` lint with `#[cfg()]` macro
📌 Pin Clippy to a nightly 📌
changelog: Pin Clippy to a specific nightly version (No more master/custom toolchain required to compile Clippy)
Addresses partially #5561. As proposed there in [this comment](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust-clippy/issues/5561#issuecomment-623109095), this kicks off the process, to help us get acquainted with how the syncs should work, before working on improving the tooling.
Open questions:
* When performing a rustup, we will need to exclude the commits that were merged that same day, or else wait until that nightly is released. I did not update the documentation about this part, mainly because I'm not sure about how to do that.
* When should we perform the rustups now? My first idea is to do it at the same time we do the clippyups, to have a clear cadence and to avoid the two copies of the repo to diverge enough to make the process painful.
* Who does the rustups now? If we follow my previous idea and do both rustup and clippyup at the same time, it would be more work for `@flip1995` who currently does the clippyups. I would prefer to establish some kind of rotation to spead the work. Other ideas?
* I'm not sure if this affects the release process in any way.
* ???
`@rust-lang/clippy` thoughts?
r? `@flip1995`
