-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1.6k
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
add manual_ok_or lint #6233
add manual_ok_or lint #6233
Conversation
r? @flip1995 (rust_highfive has picked a reviewer for you, use r? to override) |
4efcd1c
to
72d04f0
Compare
72d04f0
to
111b902
Compare
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Couldn't you implement this lint in the methods
module? You wouldn't need the whole method call extraction boilerplate there.
In a next iteration, I planned to implement the pattern matching case. See comment about this in the test file. intOpt match {
Some(v) => Ok(v),
None => Err("error"),
} This doesn't really fit in the |
Ah ok, I missed that. Then having this in a separate file is fine. |
@bors r+ Thanks! |
📌 Commit d780f61 has been approved by |
☀️ Test successful - checks-action_dev_test, checks-action_remark_test, checks-action_test |
Implements partially #5923
changelog: add lint manual_ok_or