Skip to content

Conversation

Alexendoo
Copy link
Member

r? @flip1995

For now I haven't updated the docs since people read the current README/etc for stable usage

changelog: clippy::all has been renamed to clippy::default, existing uses of clippy::all do not need to be changed

@rustbot rustbot added the S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties label Apr 24, 2025
@@ -0,0 +1,11 @@
// Tests that `clippy::all` still works without a deprecation warning
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Sorry to intrude, but why don't you want a deprecation warning?

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

It's starting as a soft deprecation since it's very widely used, it may eventually become a warning

Copy link
Member

@flip1995 flip1995 Apr 29, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I would not deprecate it. I don't think it is ever worth to do so. I think clippy::all is older than 5 years by now. It will take at least the same amount of time until clippy::default is used in more places than clippy::all, I would think. So maybe really really long-term, we can deprecate it. But that might even be the decision of a different set of people by then.

Plus, I don't see any downsides in keeping it.

Copy link
Member

@flip1995 flip1995 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Nice!

Giving @rust-lang/clippy @rust-lang/clippy-contributors until the end of the week to still raise concerns (as there's no going back realistically). But I think everyone is on-board with this.

@rustbot

This comment has been minimized.

@Jarcho
Copy link
Contributor

Jarcho commented Sep 18, 2025

Ping @Alexendoo this needs a rebase. I don't think any objections were raised.

@rustbot
Copy link
Collaborator

rustbot commented Sep 18, 2025

This PR was rebased onto a different master commit. Here's a range-diff highlighting what actually changed.

Rebasing is a normal part of keeping PRs up to date, so no action is needed—this note is just to help reviewers.

Copy link

Lintcheck changes for a033f84

Lint Added Removed Changed
clippy::lint_groups_priority 0 2 0

This comment will be updated if you push new changes

@Alexendoo Alexendoo added S-blocked Status: marked as blocked ❌ on something else such as an RFC or other implementation work and removed S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties labels Sep 27, 2025
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
S-blocked Status: marked as blocked ❌ on something else such as an RFC or other implementation work
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants