On Sun, May 4, 2025 at 7:42 PM Tamir Duberstein <tam...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> How come this vanished?
It doesn't lint anymore -- the lint only appears to be intended to
work with the standard `assert_eq!` macro (and related ones), if I am
reading its source code correctly.
I created an issue upstream and linked it into our Clippy metalist,
similar to the custom `dbg!` request:
https://github.com/rust-lang/rust-clippy/issues/14903
> nit: why not String::new() for all these?
I prefer that too, but I kept it consistent with the other lines. We
could put that as a "good first issue" unless someone gives a reason
to prefer other methods.
> Could we do this (pushing `assert_macros`) before the block above to
> avoid this body/new_body name juggling?
We can use a new variable, changing the line below (i.e. it is clear
then that we are "assembling the final body") -- I did that.
Moving the new variable then is also possible, but I think it makes it
a bit harder to see the three "main parts" that we assemble into the
final body.
But if you have a better approach or I misunderstood, please of course
feel free to send a patch (or maybe a "good first issue", since that
would be a good one I think).
Thanks!
Cheers,
Miguel
