| Commit message (Collapse) | Author | Age | Files | Lines |
| | |
|
| |
|
|
| |
Removed unnecessary lint
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
This commit executes maint/add_warning with the just added change to
deny string slices except in tests.
I recommend auditing this by checking out the previous commit followed
by running the script yourself and then verifying that the diff is
identical to this commit.
This commit makes cargo clippy fail. We will add exceptions in the next
commit.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
`clippy::collapsible_if` started triggering after bumping the MSRV to
1.88.
Since this triggers from a lot of places, and since there even are a
couple of instances where we explicitly allow `clippy::collapsible_ifs`,
I've opened #2342 for deciding what to do about it.
|
| |
|
|
| |
This adds the lint to all our crates.
|
| |
|
|
| |
Run maint/add_warning
|
| |
|
|
| |
This feature has been removed from nightly, in favor of doc_cfg.
|
| |
|
|
| |
See #2060.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
Denies 'mod.rs' files for consistency.
https://rust-lang.github.io/rust-clippy/master/index.html#mod_module_files
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
In 1.83, this warning triggers on many of our crates.
We're thinking of fixing them all, but for now,
we're going to disable the warning.
This is part of #1765.
|
| |
|
|
| |
This commit is automatically generated.
|
| | |
|
| | |
|
| | |
|
| |
|
|
| |
Closes #950.
|
| | |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
This warning kind of snuck up on us! (See #748) For now, let's
disable it. (I've cleaned it up in a couple of examples, since
those are meant to be more idiomatic and user-facing.)
Closes #748.
|
| | |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Apparently cargo fmt doesn't like these, which my perl rune didn't
delete.
This commit is precisely the result of `cargo fmt`.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
The feature we want is `#[doc = include_str!("README.md")]`, which is
stable since 1.54 and our MSRV is now 1.56.
This commit is precisely the result of the following Perl rune:
perl -i~ -0777 -pe 's{(^//!(?!.*\@\@).*\n)+}{#![doc = include_str!("../README.md")]\n}m' crates/*/src/lib.rs
|
| | |
|
| |
|
|
| |
Update all lint blocks
|
| |
|
|
| |
The remaining consequences of running add_warning
|
| |
|
|
|
| |
From running add_warning, with manual picking of the right
hunks/lines.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
This was the result of:
maint/add_warning crates/*/src/{lib,main}.rs
and then manually curating the results.
|
| |
|
|
| |
We are going to make lints the same for every crate.
|
| | |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
This crate no longer has any reason to exist. All its remaining
functionality is generic enough to go into tor-config.
In this commit, we move the contents of lib.rs into a new file in
tor-config. It contains:
* Code motion
* The minimal "mod" and "use" changes
* The minimal doc comment
* A new a compat alias for ConfigurationSources.
The compat alias is there because various crates currently speak of
arti_config::ConfigurationSources and it is most convenient to fix
them up after the type is available in tor_config.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
That's where this definitions is now. This test ought to have been
moved in
Move default_config_file() into arti-client
|
| | |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
As per
https://gitlab.torproject.org/tpo/core/arti/-/issues/472
Experimentation convinced me the Mistrust should be within the
ConfigurationSources.
|
| | |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
This is redundant, because the defaults have to be supplied by the
config builders (usually via builder default attributes).
That this is actually done and correct is tested by the
`default_config()` test case in arti/src/cfg.rs.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
This does not know anything about arti, only about TOML and Config.
Code motion, plus necessary import adjustments.
|
| |
|
|
| |
This will let other embedders use it.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
These generic arguments weren't consistent. It doesn't make sense ot
insist on getting a borrowed type and then cloning it. So tidy things
up in the direction of taking owned values, which is what
ConfigurationSources actually needs.
(My personal preference would be &dyn to avoid monomorphisation code
bloat but that was controversial last time I proposed it somewhere.)
|
| | |
|
| |
|
|
| |
Discarding this error is not right.
|
| |
|
|
|
| |
This emphasises its nature. We're going to provide a more cooked
constructor in a moment.
|
| | |
|
| | |
|
| |
|
|
| |
Code motion and import fixups.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
We put this in cfg.rs, rather than (say) socks.rs, because it has
config relating to both socks.rs and dns.rs.
Code motion and import fixups.
|
| |
|
|
| |
Code motion and import fixups.
|
| |
|
|
| |
Code motion and import fixups.
|
| |\
| |
| |
| |
| | |
Disable clippy::clone_on_ref_ptr
See merge request tpo/core/arti!352
|
| | |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| | |
This lint is IMO inherently ill-conceived.
I have looked for the reasons why this might be thought to be a good
idea and there were basically two (and they are sort of contradictory):
I. "Calling ‘.clone()` on an Rc, Arc, or Weak can obscure the fact
that only the pointer is being cloned, not the underlying data."
This is the wording from
https://rust-lang.github.io/rust-clippy/v0.0.212/#clone_on_ref_ptr
It is a bit terse; we are left to infer why it is a bad idea to
obscure this fact. It seems to me that if it is bad to obscure some
fact, that must be because the fact is a hazard. But why would it be
a hazard to not copy the underlying data ?
In other languages, faliing to copy the underlying data is a serious
correctness hazard. There is a whose class of bugs where things were
not copied, and then mutated and/or reused in multiple places in ways
that were not what the programmer intended. In my experience, this is
a very common bug when writing Python and Javascript. I'm told it's
common in golang too.
But in Rust this bug is much much harder to write. The data inside an
Arc is immutable. To have this bug you'd have use interior mutability
- ie mess around with Mutex or RefCell. That provides a good barrier
to these kind of accidents.
II. "The reason for writing Rc::clone and Arc::clone [is] to make it
clear that only the pointer is being cloned, as opposed to the
underlying data. The former is always fast, while the latter can
be very expensive depending on what is being cloned."
This is the reasoning found here
https://github.com/rust-lang/rust-clippy/issues/2048
This is saying that *not* using Arc::clone is hazardous.
Specifically, that a deep clone is a performance hazard.
But for this argument, the lint is precisely backwards. It's linting
the "good" case and asking for it to be written in a more explicit
way; while the supposedly bad case can be written conveniently.
Also, many objects (in our codebase, and in all the libraries we use)
that are Clone are in fact simply handles. They contain Arc(s) (or
similar) and are cheap to clone. Indeed, that is the usual case.
It does not make sense to distinguish in the syntax we use to clone
such a handle, whether the handle is a transparent Arc, or an opaque
struct containing one or more other handles.
Forcing Arc::clone to be written as such makes for code churn when a
type is changed from Arc<Something> to Something: Clone, or vice
versa.
|
| | | |
|
| |/ |
|
| |
|
|
| |
Closes #338.
|