Skip to content

Conversation

@rarensu
Copy link
Contributor

@rarensu rarensu commented Sep 6, 2025

What I really want to do is submit my big refactor PR, but I can't resist making all these small fixes on the way. But it's not fair to the reviewer to review many small changes and a big refactoring change at the same time. So I decided to fix as much as I can, up front. I am proud to present this branch, in which, to my knowledge, for the first time ever, cargo clippy is totally satisfied.

$ cargo clippy --all-features --examples --tests -- -Wclippy::pedantic
   Compiling fuser v0.15.1 (/home/rlawrence/Documents/fuse-project/experiment/fuser)
    Finished `dev` profile [unoptimized + debuginfo] target(s) in 3.28s

…they are better expressed as associated functions.
…ntry data, so it is better as a borrowed parameter.
…d be labeled by a markdown section `#` in the doc string. [https://rust-lang.github.io/rust-clippy/rust-1.51.0/index.html#missing_errors_doc]

I've done my best to write some kind of reasonable statement; there is room for improvement.
…ault implementations may or may not use the variables, but that doesn't help the reader understand the API; it is merely distracting.
…, `Lseek`). In `lib.rs`, moved the `ReplyX` to their own seperate lines; it's the only way to make cargo fmt alphebetize them properly. In `reply.rs`, no longer importing individual items from `::ll`; it was too hard to track them all.
…, because it's merely a coincidence that they only appear under certain feature-gated blocks; they aren't actually related to those feature gates.
…ause the target file doesn't exist. It can still fail, but the test failure should be related to the feature being tested (i.e., passthrough).
…e some testing on macOS (for example, I did, and then fixed some bugs).
…on would not work correctly for certain abi versions (e.g., less than `abi-7-21`).
…on. Seperated testing for `opened` and `opened_passthrough`.
…best to explain by comment why each clippy allow attribute is appropriate.
@cberner
Copy link
Owner

cberner commented Sep 6, 2025

Oh great! Ya, would be nice to have stricter Clippy checking. Can you submit this in a series of smaller PRs? Let's aim for ~100 lines each. That'll make it easier for me to review

@rarensu
Copy link
Contributor Author

rarensu commented Sep 7, 2025

Could you please clarify how you envision I would construct a collection of pull requests? Are these going to be in parallel or in series, all at once or one at a time?

@cberner
Copy link
Owner

cberner commented Sep 7, 2025

ya, I was thinking one at a time, in series. Like just take the first few commits from this one to start, and then as soon as that's merged the next few

@rarensu
Copy link
Contributor Author

rarensu commented Sep 9, 2025

This pull request has been superseded by a series starting with #391

@rarensu rarensu closed this Sep 9, 2025
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants