[Experimental] <T as Into<T>>::into lint
#129249
Open
+232
−29
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
|
r? @chenyukang rustbot has assigned @chenyukang. Use |
rustbot
added
O-unix
|
Some changes occurred to the CTFE / Miri engine cc @rust-lang/miri Some changes occurred in src/tools/clippy cc @rust-lang/clippy |
|
@bors try @craterbot check |
|
@bors try |
|
🔒 Merge conflict This pull request and the master branch diverged in a way that cannot be automatically merged. Please rebase on top of the latest master branch, and let the reviewer approve again. How do I rebase?Assuming
You may also read Git Rebasing to Resolve Conflicts by Drew Blessing for a short tutorial. Please avoid the "Resolve conflicts" button on GitHub. It uses Sometimes step 4 will complete without asking for resolution. This is usually due to difference between how Error message |
estebank
commented
Aug 18, 2024
compiler/rustc_lint/src/builtin.rs
Outdated
Comment on lines
3102
to
3120
| fn check_item_post(&mut self, cx: &LateContext<'tcx>, item: &hir::Item<'_>) { | ||
| let hir::ItemKind::Use(path, kind) = item.kind else { return }; | ||
| tracing::info!("{:#?}", item); | ||
| tracing::info!(?path, ?kind); | ||
| for res in &path.res { | ||
| let Res::Def(DefKind::TyAlias, def_id) = res else { continue }; | ||
| let ty = cx.tcx.type_of(def_id).instantiate_identity(); | ||
| let name = cx.tcx.item_name(*def_id); | ||
| // println!("{ty:?} {name:?}"); | ||
| self.ignored_types.push(ty); | ||
| for stripped in cx.tcx.stripped_cfg_items(def_id.krate) { | ||
| if stripped.name.name == name { | ||
| tracing::info!("{name:#?}"); | ||
| } | ||
| } | ||
| } | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This is not the right way to do this check, but it was the fastest way of getting a semi-accurate discard of types that have type aliases in scope to somewhat handle platform cfg cases.
|
@bors try |
bors
added a commit
to rust-lang-ci/rust
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 18, 2024
[Experimental] `<T as Into<T>>::into` lint Running crater to see how common that pattern is. The Lint would have to be at most warn-by-default because there are a handful of cases detected that are actually perfectly reasonable (`type` aliases with per-platform `cfg`, or macros) which are now at best half-heartedly handled. I've detected a handful of cases where we're calling `.into()` unnecessarily in the `rustc` codebase as well, and changed those.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
|
💔 Test failed - checks-actions |
bors
added
S-waiting-on-author
|
🤔 looks like you are reimplementing a subset of https://rust-lang.github.io/rust-clippy/master/index.html#/useless_conversion ? edit: spoiler |
|
looks a bit like a mix of |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
traviscross
added
the
S-experimental
|
@matthiaskrgr I'm trying to gauge how common the root cause of the recent |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
oli-obk
added
A-lints
estebank
force-pushed
the
useless-into
branch
from
bc26a90 to
293695f
Compare
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
estebank
force-pushed
the
useless-into
branch
from
293695f to
399747c
Compare
|
@bors try |
bors
added a commit
to rust-lang-ci/rust
that referenced
this pull request
Jan 10, 2025
[Experimental] `<T as Into<T>>::into` lint Running crater to see how common that pattern is. The Lint would have to be at most warn-by-default because there are a handful of cases detected that are actually perfectly reasonable (`type` aliases with per-platform `cfg`, or macros) which are now at best half-heartedly handled. I've detected a handful of cases where we're calling `.into()` unnecessarily in the `rustc` codebase as well, and changed those. CC rust-lang#127343.
|
☀️ Try build successful - checks-actions |
|
@craterbot check |
|
👌 Experiment ℹ️ Crater is a tool to run experiments across parts of the Rust ecosystem. Learn more |
craterbot
added
S-waiting-on-crater
|
🚧 Experiment ℹ️ Crater is a tool to run experiments across parts of the Rust ecosystem. Learn more |
|
🎉 Experiment
|
craterbot
added
S-waiting-on-review
|
@estebank Skimming over the results, everything being flagged looks like the lint is operating exactly as intended. I personally think it'd be reasonable to make this warn-by-default. |
|
@joshtriplett I have some additional work I want to do to minimize false positives (once I get a |
|
@estebank I would aim for directly getting this into rustc, rather than trying to go back and fix the clippy lint. Do you think it'd be worth landing this as allow-by-default, to reduce the amount of work you need to do to keep this up to date as you work on the false-positive-reduction to make it warn-by-default? |
Let me see what I can accomplish in the coming days. We might still want to make it allow-by-default at first, and go file PRs for the projects affected in the crater run, but then we can enable it after a (few?) cycle(s). I just realized that we have no mechanism for "enable this lint as deny or warn on nightly but not on stable" as a way of getting feedback on lints from nightly users before it starts hitting stable users. The only way of doing that is making it warn-by-default and then patch beta to make it allow-by-default. It sounds like a reasonable thing to do for any "iffy" lints going forward. |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Running crater to see how common that pattern is. The Lint would have to be at most warn-by-default because there are a handful of cases detected that are actually perfectly reasonable (
typealiases with per-platformcfg, or macros) which are now at best half-heartedly handled.I've detected a handful of cases where we're calling
.into()unnecessarily in therustccodebase as well, and changed those.CC #127343.