Add MSRV to more lints specified in #6097
add MSRV to more lints specified in #6097
add instructions for adding msrv in other lints
update tests
- [x] `redundant_field_names` requires Rust 1.17 due to suggest feature stablized in that version.
- [x] `redundant_static_lifetimes` requires Rust 1.17 due to suggest feature stablized in that version.
- [x] `filter_map_next` requires Rust 1.30 due to suggest `Iterator::find_map`.
- [x] `checked_conversions` requires Rust 1.34 due to suggest `TryFrom`.
- [x] `match_like_matches_macro` requires Rust 1.42 due to suggest `matches!`. Addressed in #6201
- [x] `manual_strip` requires Rust 1.45 due to suggest `str::{strip_prefix, strip_suffix}`. Addressed in #6201
- [x] `option_as_ref_deref` requires Rust 1.40 due to suggest `Option::{as_deref, as_deref_mut}`. Addressed in #6201
- [x] `manual_non_exhaustive` requires Rust 1.40 due to suggest `#[non_exhaustive]`. Addressed in #6201
- [x] `manual_range_contains` requires Rust 1.35 due to suggest `Range*::contains`.
- [x] `use_self` requires Rust 1.37 due to suggest `Self::Variant on enum`.
- [x] `mem_replace_with_default` requires Rust 1.40 due to suggest `mem::take`.
- [x] `map_unwrap_or` requires Rust 1.41 due to suggest `Result::{map_or, map_or_else}`.
- [x] `missing_const_for_fn` requires Rust 1.46 due to `match/if/loop in const fn` needs that version.
changelog: Add MSRV config to more lints. ^This is now the complete list, AFAWK
Add lint print_stderr
Resolves#6348
Almost identical to print_stdout, this lint applies to the `eprintln!` and `eprint!` macros rather than `println!` and `print!`.
changelog: Add new lint [`print_stderr`]. [`println_empty_string`] and [`print_with_newline`] now apply to `eprint!()` and `eprintln!()` respectively.
Added a lint-fraction-readability flag to the configuration
This adds an option to disable the `unreadable_literal` lint for floats with a longer fraction. This allows users to write `0.100200300` without getting a warning. Fixes#4176
I have some open questions about this PR:
1. I've named the option `lint-fraction-readability` is this a good name or should I rename it to something else?
2. What should the default configuration value be?
* The current default value is `true` as this was also the previous default.
3. Do I have to document this new option somewhere else or will it be extracted from the code comment?
4. The current fix option will also rewrite the fraction if the integer part violates the `unreadable_literal` lint it would otherwise also trigger the `inconsistent_digit_grouping` lint. Is this also okay?
* `1.100200300` will be unaffected by the fix function
* `100200300.100200300` will be effected and fixed to `100_200_300.100_200_300`
---
The project needed some getting used to but I'm happy with the result. A big thank you to `@flip1995` for giving me some pointers for this implementation and to everyone for the great introduction documentation!
---
changelog: Added the `unreadable-literal-lint-fractions` configuration to disable the `unreadable_literal` lint for fractions
Moved map_err_ignore to restriction and updated help message
This MR moves map_err_ignore lint from `pedantic` to the `restriction` category of lints and updates the help message to give the user an option to ignore the lint by naming the closure variable e.g. `.map_err(|_ignored| ...`
---
changelog: move map_err_ignore to restriction category
Specifically ptr::{sub, wrapping_sub, add, wrapping_add, offset, wrapping_offset} and slice::{from_raw_parts, from_raw_parts_mut}
The lint now also looks for size_of calls through casts (Since offset takes an isize)
Also fix review comments:
- Use const arrays and iterate them for the method/function names
- merge 2 if_chain's into one using a rest pattern
- remove unnecessary unsafe block in test
And make the lint only point to the count expression instead of the entire function call
Add Collapsible match lint
changelog: Add collapsible_match lint
Closes#1252Closes#2521
This lint finds nested `match` or `if let` patterns that can be squashed together. It is designed to be very conservative to only find cases where merging the patterns would most likely reduce cognitive complexity.
Example:
```rust
match result {
Ok(opt) => match opt {
Some(x) => x,
_ => return,
}
_ => return,
}
```
to
```rust
match result {
Ok(Some(x)) => x,
_ => return,
}
```
These criteria must be met for the lint to fire:
* The inner match has exactly 2 branches.
* Both the outer and inner match have a "wild" branch like `_ => ..`. There is a special case for `None => ..` to also be considered "wild-like".
* The contents of the wild branches are identical.
* The binding which "links" the matches is never used elsewhere.
Thanks to the hir, `if let`'s are easily included with this lint since they are desugared into equivalent `match`'es.
I think this would fit into the style category, but I would also understand changing it to pedantic.
