silenced a bunch of misleading Clippy warnings #176
Conversation
BartMassey
force-pushed
the
clippy-approved
branch
from
3e25c6e to
5326052
Compare
|
@cuviper These diffs are a bit gratuitous but I think they'll be a net positive. I chose to silence Clippy rather than change working code any more than necessary. Hopefully cutting down the Clippy noise will help the next person. |
src/algorithms.rs
Outdated
| @@ -347,6 +347,7 @@ fn bigint_from_slice(slice: &[BigDigit]) -> BigInt { | |||
| BigInt::from(biguint_from_vec(slice.to_vec())) | |||
| } | |||
|
|
|||
| #[allow(clippy::many_single_char_names)] | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Style-wise, I'd prefer attributes to be placed after doc comments, directly before the code they modify.
| value.to_biguint().ok_or(TryFromBigIntError::new(())) | ||
| value | ||
| .to_biguint() | ||
| .ok_or_else(|| TryFromBigIntError::new(())) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think clippy is being overly fussy here since TryFromBigIntError<()> is a ZST, and new isn't doing anything significant, but I guess there's no harm in wrapping this. Another option would be to write this as a direct struct initialization for the ZST, but I think it won't matter for performance either way.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Ah. Yeah, I think it's probably the cleanest way to shut Clippy up.
| 1 => u64::from(v.data[0]), | ||
| 1 => | ||
| { | ||
| #[allow(clippy::useless_conversion)] |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Why is the attribute repeated here?
BartMassey
force-pushed
the
clippy-approved
branch
from
5326052 to
a2b160c
Compare
BartMassey
changed the title
|
bors r+ |
There were a bunch of code quality Clippy warnings that didn't apply for various reasons.
There was an ok_or() that could have been an ok_or_else() that Clippy caught. Turns out it's for a ZST, so doesn't matter, but was "fixed" anyway to silence Clippy.
This will hopefully make "cargo clippy" more useful for the next person.