Rename rustc::pass_by_value lint as rustc::disallowed_pass_by_ref.#153029
Open
nnethercote wants to merge 1 commit intorust-lang:mainfrom
Open
Rename rustc::pass_by_value lint as rustc::disallowed_pass_by_ref.#153029nnethercote wants to merge 1 commit intorust-lang:mainfrom
rustc::pass_by_value lint as rustc::disallowed_pass_by_ref.#153029nnethercote wants to merge 1 commit intorust-lang:mainfrom
Conversation
Collaborator
|
Some changes occurred to MIR optimizations cc @rust-lang/wg-mir-opt |
rustbot
added
A-query-system
nnethercote
changed the title
pass_by_value lint as disallowed_pass_by_ref.rustc::pass_by_value lint as rustc::disallowed_pass_by_ref.
Contributor
Author
|
BTW, I'm not 100% certain about how I handled bootstrapping. It seems reasonable but I couldn't find any other examples in the code that looked quite the same as what I did. |
Urgau
reviewed
Feb 24, 2026
Member
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Code looks fine.
Regarding the lint name in the face of our guidelines, and in particular rule 2, I'm wondering if it shouldn't be named: rustc::disallowed_pass_by_ref_types.
Though that seems a bit long, maybe we can just remove the pass part and have rustc::disallowed_by_ref_types. What do you think?
Contributor
Author
|
I think the |
Member
|
I'm fine with that. |
Urgau
approved these changes
Feb 24, 2026
Member
|
@bors r+ rollup |
Contributor
rust-bors
bot
added
S-waiting-on-bors
GuillaumeGomez
added a commit
to GuillaumeGomez/rust
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 24, 2026
…, r=Urgau Rename `rustc::pass_by_value` lint as `rustc::disallowed_pass_by_ref`. 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) r? @Urgau
Contributor
Author
|
For the record: @Urgau and I had a private discussion about the names. We both liked |
rust-bors bot
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 25, 2026
Rollup of 8 pull requests Successful merges: - #149169 (ptr::replace: make calls on ZST null ptr not UB) - #150562 (Fix doc link used in suggestion for pinning self) - #152679 (rustc_expand: improve diagnostics for non-repeatable metavars) - #153017 (Implement debuginfo for unsafe binder types) - #152868 (delete some very old trivial `Box` tests) - #152922 (rustc_public: Make fields that shouldn't be exposed visible only in `rustc_public`) - #153029 (Rename `rustc::pass_by_value` lint as `rustc::disallowed_pass_by_ref`.) - #153051 (Migration of `LintDiagnostic` - part 3)
Member
rust-bors
bot
added
S-waiting-on-author
Contributor
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)
nnethercote
force-pushed
the
disallowed-pass-by-ref
branch
from
d60e15f to
8eed8bd
Compare
Contributor
Author
|
I added a temporary @bors r=Urgau |
Contributor
rust-bors
bot
added
S-waiting-on-bors
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
4 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
The name
pass_by_valueis completely wrong. The lint actually checks for the use of pass by reference for types marked withrustc_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_macrosdisallowed_methodsdisallowed_namesdisallowed_script_identsdisallowed_typesThe
pass_by_valuepart of the name aligns with the following clippy lints:needless_pass_by_valueneedless_pass_by_ref_muttrivially_copy_pass_by_reflarge_types_passed_by_value(less so)r? @Urgau