Use #[expect(…)] instead of #[allow(…)], remove unnecessary allows #2784
Conversation
|
Feel free to fix this for all build targets - but it might be a world of pain :) |
|
I did some more, but I'll leave the rest to someone else. |
|
Also: I cannot guarantee that I haven't broken anything. I've manually checked as much as possible and the CI found stuff as well, but I may have still missed some cfg-dependent stuff (there's a lot in there lol). On the upside, I've only touched linting-related things. So if anyone's computer starts complaining, it's easy to just re-add the warning or change it back from an |
|
|
||
| # start manager in background, then start one client | ||
| timeout 32s ./${FUZZER_NAME} --cores 0 --input ./corpus 2>/dev/null & | ||
| timeout 31s ./${FUZZER_NAME} --cores 1 --input ./corpus | tee fuzz_stdout.log 2>/dev/null || true |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I added this, otherwise the test doesn't pass. Doesn't either on main btw.
And a few other very small tidbits here and there. Just tidying things with as little change to the logic as possible.
|
Not quite sure why I did this. But it's done. |
#[expect(…)]returns a lint warning (configured to be an error) if the lint warning is not present without the attribute.This also means I was able to remove a lot of
allowstatements.I suggest in the future,
expectis used wherever possible. The only exceptions I've stumbled across are when they are used in a macro and only appear for some macro calls (thinktrivial_numeric_castsof au64to a type passed to the struct, and it is called foru64among others) and if the warning only appears in certain cfgs.