Fix bug. Don't expect lint when acc is on rhs

This commit is contained in:
Phil Ellison 2018-01-17 20:11:40 +00:00
parent 1cac693bc7
commit 29a2dd4cb8
2 changed files with 22 additions and 19 deletions

View File

@ -389,19 +389,12 @@ fn iter_skip_next() {
fn unnecessary_fold() {
// Can be replaced by .any
let _ = (0..3).fold(false, |acc, x| acc || x > 2);
let _ = (0..3).fold(false, |acc, x| x > 2 || acc);
// Can be replaced by .all
let _ = (0..3).fold(true, |acc, x| acc && x > 2);
let _ = (0..3).fold(true, |acc, x| x > 2 && acc);
// Can be replaced by .sum
let _ = (0..3).fold(0, |acc, x| acc + x);
let _ = (0..3).fold(0, |acc, x| x + acc);
// Can be replaced by .product
let _ = (0..3).fold(1, |acc, x| acc * x);
let _ = (0..3).fold(1, |acc, x| x * acc);
}
/// Should trigger the `UNNECESSARY_FOLD` lint, with an error span including exactly `.fold(...)`
@ -416,6 +409,16 @@ fn unnecessary_fold_should_ignore() {
let _ = (0..3).fold(1, |acc, x| acc + x);
let _ = (0..3).fold(0, |acc, x| acc * x);
let _ = (0..3).fold(0, |acc, x| 1 + acc + x);
// We only match against an accumulator on the left
// hand side. We could lint for .sum and .product when
// it's on the right, but don't for now (and this wouldn't
// be valid if we extended the lint to cover arbitrary numeric
// types).
let _ = (0..3).fold(false, |acc, x| x > 2 || acc);
let _ = (0..3).fold(true, |acc, x| x > 2 && acc);
let _ = (0..3).fold(0, |acc, x| x + acc);
let _ = (0..3).fold(1, |acc, x| x * acc);
}
#[allow(similar_names)]

View File

@ -502,33 +502,33 @@ error: this `.fold` can be written more succinctly using another method
= note: `-D fold-any` implied by `-D warnings`
error: this `.fold` can be written more succinctly using another method
--> $DIR/methods.rs:395:19
--> $DIR/methods.rs:393:19
|
395 | let _ = (0..3).fold(true, |acc, x| acc && x > 2);
393 | let _ = (0..3).fold(true, |acc, x| acc && x > 2);
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ help: try: `.all(|x| x > 2)`
error: this `.fold` can be written more succinctly using another method
--> $DIR/methods.rs:399:19
--> $DIR/methods.rs:395:19
|
399 | let _ = (0..3).fold(0, |acc, x| acc + x);
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ help: try: `.sum(|x| x)`
395 | let _ = (0..3).fold(0, |acc, x| acc + x);
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ help: try: `.sum()`
error: this `.fold` can be written more succinctly using another method
--> $DIR/methods.rs:403:19
--> $DIR/methods.rs:397:19
|
403 | let _ = (0..3).fold(1, |acc, x| acc * x);
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ help: try: `.product(|x| x)`
397 | let _ = (0..3).fold(1, |acc, x| acc * x);
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ help: try: `.product()`
error: this `.fold` can be written more succinctly using another method
--> $DIR/methods.rs:409:34
--> $DIR/methods.rs:402:34
|
409 | let _ = (0..3).map(|x| 2 * x).fold(false, |acc, x| acc || x > 2);
402 | let _ = (0..3).map(|x| 2 * x).fold(false, |acc, x| acc || x > 2);
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ help: try: `.any(|x| x > 2)`
error: used unwrap() on an Option value. If you don't want to handle the None case gracefully, consider using expect() to provide a better panic message
--> $DIR/methods.rs:424:13
--> $DIR/methods.rs:427:13
|
424 | let _ = opt.unwrap();
427 | let _ = opt.unwrap();
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^
|
= note: `-D option-unwrap-used` implied by `-D warnings`