| Commit message (Collapse) | Author | Age | Files | Lines |
|---|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
`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.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
Discussion here
https://gitlab.torproject.org/tpo/core/arti/-/merge_requests/2502#note_3090554
https://gitlab.torproject.org/tpo/core/arti/-/merge_requests/2502#note_3090556
|
| | |
|
| |
|
|
| |
This commit is automatically generated.
|
| | |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
We're going to put more in here.
(Yes, I know we just invented this...)
|
| |
|
|
|
| |
Modules with the same name as external crates don't work well with our
MSRV.
|
| | |
|
| | |
|
| | |
|
| | |
|
| | |
|
| |
|
|
| |
Closes #950.
|
| | |
|
| | |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
This deduplicates some trait delegation.
We want this now because we're about to introduce a third mock
runtime, so this would become triplication otherwise.
|
| | |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
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
|
| |
|
|
|
| |
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.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
- arti#445 highlighted the lack of good documentation around Arti's
multiple runtime support, as well as it being difficult to determine
what runtime was actually in use.
- Improve the documentation to solve the first problem.
- To solve the second problem, make Runtime require Debug (which is
arguably a good idea anyway, since it makes them easier to embed in
things), and print out the current runtime's Debug information when
arti is invoked with `--version`.
- (It also prints out other Cargo features, too!)
fixes arti#445
|
| | |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
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.
|
| | |
|
| | |
|
| | |
|
|
|
This will cause some pain for now, but now is really the best time
to do this kind of thing.
|
