Expand for_loops_over_fallibles lint to lint on fallibles behind references.

[zachs18]

Extends the scope of the (warn-by-default) lint for_loops_over_fallibles from just for _ in x where x: Option<_>/Result<_, _> to also cover x: &(mut) Option<_>/Result<_>

fn main() {
    // Current lints
    for _ in Some(42) {}
    for _ in Ok::<_, i32>(42) {}

    // New lints
    for _ in &Some(42) {}
    for _ in &mut Some(42) {}
    for _ in &Ok::<_, i32>(42) {}
    for _ in &mut Ok::<_, i32>(42) {}

    // Should not lint
    for _ in Some(42).into_iter() {}
    for _ in Some(42).iter() {}
    for _ in Some(42).iter_mut() {}
    for _ in Ok::<_, i32>(42).into_iter() {}
    for _ in Ok::<_, i32>(42).iter() {}
    for _ in Ok::<_, i32>(42).iter_mut() {}
}

cargo build diff

diff --git a/old.out b/new.out
index 84215aa..ca195a7 100644
--- a/old.out
+++ b/new.out
@@ -1,33 +1,93 @@
 warning: for loop over an `Option`. This is more readably written as an `if let` statement
  --> src/main.rs:3:14
   |
 3 |     for _ in Some(42) {}
   |              ^^^^^^^^
   |
   = note: `#[warn(for_loops_over_fallibles)]` on by default
 help: to check pattern in a loop use `while let`
   |
 3 |     while let Some(_) = Some(42) {}
   |     ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~
 help: consider using `if let` to clear intent
   |
 3 |     if let Some(_) = Some(42) {}
   |     ~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~
 
 warning: for loop over a `Result`. This is more readably written as an `if let` statement
  --> src/main.rs:4:14
   |
 4 |     for _ in Ok::<_, i32>(42) {}
   |              ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
   |
 help: to check pattern in a loop use `while let`
   |
 4 |     while let Ok(_) = Ok::<_, i32>(42) {}
   |     ~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~
 help: consider using `if let` to clear intent
   |
 4 |     if let Ok(_) = Ok::<_, i32>(42) {}
   |     ~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~
 
-warning: `for-loops-over-fallibles` (bin "for-loops-over-fallibles") generated 2 warnings
-    Finished `dev` profile [unoptimized + debuginfo] target(s) in 0.04s
+warning: for loop over a `&Option`. This is more readably written as an `if let` statement
+ --> src/main.rs:7:14
+  |
+7 |     for _ in &Some(42) {}
+  |              ^^^^^^^^^
+  |
+help: to check pattern in a loop use `while let`
+  |
+7 |     while let Some(_) = &Some(42) {}
+  |     ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~
+help: consider using `if let` to clear intent
+  |
+7 |     if let Some(_) = &Some(42) {}
+  |     ~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~
+
+warning: for loop over a `&mut Option`. This is more readably written as an `if let` statement
+ --> src/main.rs:8:14
+  |
+8 |     for _ in &mut Some(42) {}
+  |              ^^^^^^^^^^^^^
+  |
+help: to check pattern in a loop use `while let`
+  |
+8 |     while let Some(_) = &mut Some(42) {}
+  |     ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~
+help: consider using `if let` to clear intent
+  |
+8 |     if let Some(_) = &mut Some(42) {}
+  |     ~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~
+
+warning: for loop over a `&Result`. This is more readably written as an `if let` statement
+ --> src/main.rs:9:14
+  |
+9 |     for _ in &Ok::<_, i32>(42) {}
+  |              ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
+  |
+help: to check pattern in a loop use `while let`
+  |
+9 |     while let Ok(_) = &Ok::<_, i32>(42) {}
+  |     ~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~
+help: consider using `if let` to clear intent
+  |
+9 |     if let Ok(_) = &Ok::<_, i32>(42) {}
+  |     ~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~
+
+warning: for loop over a `&mut Result`. This is more readably written as an `if let` statement
+  --> src/main.rs:10:14
+   |
+10 |     for _ in &mut Ok::<_, i32>(42) {}
+   |              ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
+   |
+help: to check pattern in a loop use `while let`
+   |
+10 |     while let Ok(_) = &mut Ok::<_, i32>(42) {}
+   |     ~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~
+help: consider using `if let` to clear intent
+   |
+10 |     if let Ok(_) = &mut Ok::<_, i32>(42) {}
+   |     ~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~
+
+warning: `for-loops-over-fallibles` (bin "for-loops-over-fallibles") generated 6 warnings
+    Finished `dev` profile [unoptimized + debuginfo] target(s) in 0.02s

---

Question:

• Currently, the article an is used for &Option, and &mut Option in the lint diagnostic, since that's what Option uses. Is this okay or should it be changed? (likewise, a is used for &Result and &mut Result) The article a is used for &Option, &mut Option, &Result, &mut Result and (as before) Result. Only Option uses an (as before).

@rustbot label +A-lint

[rustbot]

r? @nnethercote

rustbot has assigned @nnethercote.
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]

Some changes occurred in match lowering

cc @Nadrieril

[Noratrieb]

r=me after fixing the article

[Noratrieb]

@bors r+

[bors]

📌 Commit 66573b7 has been approved by Nilstrieb

It is now in the queue for this repository.

[bors]

⌛ Testing commit 66573b7 with merge 173e9a7...

[Noratrieb]

too much hope @bors r-

[zachs18]

@rustbot ready

CI is green so probably that's all the tests fixed?

[nnethercote]

@bors r=Nilstrieb

[bors]

📌 Commit 376a8c0 has been approved by Nilstrieb

It is now in the queue for this repository.

[bors]

⌛ Testing commit 376a8c0 with merge 4027f3d...

[bors]

💔 Test failed - checks-actions

[rustbot]

Some changes occurred in src/tools/compiletest

cc @jieyouxu

[Noratrieb]

@bors r+

[bors]

📌 Commit a59d071 has been approved by Nilstrieb

It is now in the queue for this repository.