The name `pass_by_value` is completely wrong. The lint actually checks
for the use of pass by reference for types marked with
`rustc_pass_by_value`.
The hardest part of this was choosing the new name. The `disallowed_`
part of the name closely matches the following clippy lints:
- `disallowed_macros`
- `disallowed_methods`
- `disallowed_names`
- `disallowed_script_idents`
- `disallowed_types`
The `pass_by_value` part of the name aligns with the following clippy
lints:
- `needless_pass_by_value`
- `needless_pass_by_ref_mut`
- `trivially_copy_pass_by_ref`
- `large_types_passed_by_value` (less so)
`CheckAttrVisitor::check_doc_keyword` checks `#[doc(keyword = "..")]`
attributes to ensure they are on an empty module, and that the value is
a non-empty identifier.
The `rustc::existing_doc_keyword` lint checks these attributes to ensure
that the value is the name of a keyword.
It's silly to have two different checking mechanisms for these
attributes. This commit does the following.
- Changes `check_doc_keyword` to check that the value is the name of a
keyword (avoiding the need for the identifier check, which removes a
dependency on `rustc_lexer`).
- Removes the lint.
- Updates tests accordingly.
There is one hack: the `SelfTy` FIXME case used to used to be handled by
disabling the lint, but now is handled with a special case in
`is_doc_keyword`. That hack will go away if/when the FIXME is fixed.
Co-Authored-By: Guillaume Gomez <guillaume1.gomez@gmail.com>
Nicholas Nethercote