Add E0602

[GuillaumeGomez]

Part of #42229.

cc @Susurrus

[rust-highfive]

r? @eddyb

(rust_highfive has picked a reviewer for you, use r? to override)

[Susurrus]

So you're making the command-line lint and the lint attribute errors separate errors then? Is this formatting in line when rustc emits errors for other command-line arguments? I wouldn't expect error numbers for command-line parsing issues, just for code-related errors (like the lint attribute error).

[eddyb]

Hmm, saw @Susurrus' comment too late. @rust-lang/compiler any opinions?

EDIT: you saw nothing

[Susurrus]

LOL. Glad that got sorted (don't worry, I have email proof!) ✉️

[GuillaumeGomez]

Yep, I still need to add the "code lint" error code, but it seems more logical for me in order to make better error explanation.

[Susurrus]

Sure, adding more details wouldn't be a bad thing. I think it's unnecessary, but I don't think it'd hurt for users not very comfortable at the command line (and general argument syntax).

Two questions:

• Would it make sense to specify the name of the invalid lint?
• Would it make sense to list all valid lints? I'm thinking about helping the user fix the issue. If they aren't positive of all the valid lints, I don't even know where I could look that info up!

[GuillaumeGomez]

The lint name is given iirc. And I don't think giving the full lint name list is a good idea since it's getting quite long. ;)

[arielb1]

Adding levenshtein-based suggestions would be nice, but I think it's a little bit to much.

@bors r+

[bors]

📌 Commit 7cc1ab4 has been approved by arielb1

[bors]

⌛ Testing commit 7cc1ab4 with merge 76242ae...

[bors]

☀️ Test successful - status-appveyor, status-travis
Approved by: arielb1
Pushing 76242ae to master...