Skip to content

allow clippy manual ascii check for definitions of them#143367

Closed
hkBst wants to merge 1 commit into
rust-lang:masterfrom
hkBst:clippy-fix-3
Closed

allow clippy manual ascii check for definitions of them#143367
hkBst wants to merge 1 commit into
rust-lang:masterfrom
hkBst:clippy-fix-3

Conversation

@hkBst

@hkBst hkBst commented Jul 3, 2025

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

No description provided.

@rustbot

rustbot commented Jul 3, 2025

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

r? @jhpratt

rustbot has assigned @jhpratt.
They will have a look at your PR within the next two weeks and either review your PR or reassign to another reviewer.

Use r? to explicitly pick a reviewer

@rustbot rustbot added S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. T-libs Relevant to the library team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue. labels Jul 3, 2025
@rust-log-analyzer

This comment has been minimized.

@rust-log-analyzer

This comment has been minimized.

@jhpratt

jhpratt commented Jul 3, 2025

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Is clippy run on the standard library? I didn't think that was the case.

@hkBst

hkBst commented Jul 4, 2025

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

Currently clippy gives a lot of warnings, making it pretty useless, so I'm trying to change that.

@jhpratt

jhpratt commented Jul 4, 2025

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Is that something the libs team has approved? While a single PR isn't much, a series of them is.

@hkBst

hkBst commented Jul 4, 2025

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

I haven't asked for specific approval for this idea. If you think that I should, then I'm happy to do that.

@jhpratt

jhpratt commented Jul 5, 2025

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

I think that would be best to avoid doing something the team doesn't ultimately care for. A quick search shows that you've already opened a dozen PRs, which is exactly what I expected. If the team doesn't want to enable clippy in the end, then some of them (like this) wouldn't serve a direct purpose.

@RalfJung

RalfJung commented Jul 6, 2025

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Yeah, generally please talk to the team(s) before opening a dozen PRs. That's clearly a larger project that needs some coordination.

@workingjubilee

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

I do not think we should enable any lints which fire on the implementations of standard library functions inside the standard library.

@rustbot rustbot removed the S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. label Jul 6, 2025
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

T-libs Relevant to the library team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue.

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

6 participants