Add new multiple_bound_locations lint
#12259
Conversation
rustbot
added
the
S-waiting-on-review
GuillaumeGomez
force-pushed
the
multiple-bound-locations
branch
from
9648d17
to
6a8d531
Compare
|
Fixed CI :) |
|
☔ The latest upstream changes (presumably #12306) made this pull request unmergeable. Please resolve the merge conflicts. |
GuillaumeGomez
force-pushed
the
multiple-bound-locations
branch
from
6a8d531
to
143bee4
Compare
|
Fixed conflict. r? @flip1995 |
|
I won't get to reviewing this in the next 1-2 weeks, as I have a lot on my plate right now (Clippy and day_job), so: r? clippy |
This comment was marked as outdated.
This comment was marked as outdated.
|
That was unlucky. r? @blyxyas as you are back to reviewing 😅 |
|
r? @llogiq Sorry for the delay, I was quite sick in the last two weeks. |
| /// Check if a generic is defined both in the bound predicate and in the `where` clause. | ||
| /// | ||
| /// ### Why is this bad? | ||
| /// It can be confusing for developpers when seeing bounds for a generic in multiple places. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
| /// It can be confusing for developpers when seeing bounds for a generic in multiple places. | |
| /// It can be confusing for developers when seeing bounds for a generic in multiple places. |
Typo
| @@ -0,0 +1,24 @@ | |||
| #![warn(clippy::multiple_bound_locations)] | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'd also like to see tests for the various possible combinations of generic impls with generic methods.
GuillaumeGomez
force-pushed
the
multiple-bound-locations
branch
2 times, most recently
from
e8e666f
to
4dc952c
Compare
Hope you're feeling better. :-/
Fixed the typo and extended tests. |
| { | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| struct B; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
What if B had generics, say one type and one lifetime, just to mix it up a bit?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Not sure to see what you want to test here. ^^'
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Say what if you had struct B<F>(F); and then an impl<F> B<F> { fn foo(_f: F) -> Self where F: std::fmt::Display { todo!() } }?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It won't emit the lint but I can add a check for it if you want?
GuillaumeGomez
force-pushed
the
multiple-bound-locations
branch
from
4dc952c
to
6578e56
Compare
|
|
||
| struct C<F>(F); | ||
|
|
||
| impl<F> C<F> { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
What if we had another bound on F here?
Also: Should that even lint? Perhaps it's useful to have a secondary bound for just one method of the impl?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I have no opinion about this, hence why I didn't add checks on impl blocks. So up to you. :)
GuillaumeGomez
force-pushed
the
multiple-bound-locations
branch
from
6578e56
to
762448b
Compare
|
And fixed CI. :) |
|
Thank you! @bors r+ |
|
☀️ Test successful - checks-action_dev_test, checks-action_remark_test, checks-action_test |
Fixes #7181.
r? @llogiq
changelog: Add new
multiple_bound_locationslint