Lint cleanups#157689
Conversation
|
@bors try @rust-timer queue |
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.
This comment was marked as outdated.
This comment was marked as outdated.
c0abbd2 to
fe67847
Compare
|
@bors try @rust-timer queue |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
|
cc @rust-lang/clippy |
|
@nnethercote Those changes will conflict on the Clippy side with the ones being currently merged: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/157779/changes#diff-87bfc7a19a52188bf03cd0c38999b9a1adf259e1631f5c493cd30704340dd602 Also, |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
|
Finished benchmarking commit (f45cfe7): comparison URL. Overall result: ✅ improvements - no action neededBenchmarking means the PR may be perf-sensitive. Consider adding rollup=never if this change is not fit for rolling up. @rustbot label: -S-waiting-on-perf -perf-regression Instruction countOur most reliable metric. Used to determine the overall result above. However, even this metric can be noisy.
Max RSS (memory usage)This perf run didn't have relevant results for this metric. CyclesResults (secondary -3.1%)A less reliable metric. May be of interest, but not used to determine the overall result above.
Binary sizeThis perf run didn't have relevant results for this metric. Bootstrap: 517.481s -> 517.406s (-0.01%) |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
fe67847 to
ceedbb9
Compare
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
|
#157762 turns out to not be necessary but these cleanups are still worth merging. I removed the final commit that only affected Clippy. |
|
@bors try @rust-timer queue |
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.
|
Finished benchmarking commit (e117acb): comparison URL. Overall result: no relevant changes - no action neededBenchmarking means the PR may be perf-sensitive. Consider adding rollup=never if this change is not fit for rolling up. @rustbot label: -S-waiting-on-perf -perf-regression Instruction countThis perf run didn't have relevant results for this metric. Max RSS (memory usage)Results (primary 0.1%, secondary 0.8%)A less reliable metric. May be of interest, but not used to determine the overall result above.
CyclesResults (primary -1.2%)A less reliable metric. May be of interest, but not used to determine the overall result above.
Binary sizeThis perf run didn't have relevant results for this metric. Bootstrap: 519.503s -> 523.672s (0.80%) |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
1257ceb to
4d0dced
Compare
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
|
I rebased. |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
These structs can own the `Vec`.
By using `retain` instead of `into_iter`/`filter`/`collect`.
All the other paired methods in this trait have the form `check_foo`/`check_foo_post`.
Currently the use points need to handle method attributes, due to a single low-value doc comment in each macro's body. This commit moves those doc comments so the use points can be simplified. The comments are also made more accurate -- there are now multiple `_post` methods and the comments now cover all of them, not just one of them.
That reflects how they're mostly used and avoids the need for some long
signatures. And it matches `{Early,Late}LintPassObject` nicely.
We check if `passes` is empty and then filter elements out of it. This means we can miss optimizing some cases, e.g. when bootstrapping. This commit moves the `is_empty` check after the filtering.
4d0dced to
618f5cd
Compare
|
This PR was rebased onto a different main commit. Here's a range-diff highlighting what actually changed. Rebasing is a normal part of keeping PRs up to date, so no action is needed—this note is just to help reviewers. |
|
I rebased again. |
View all comments
Details in individual commits.
r? @GuillaumeGomez