Skip to content
This repository has been archived by the owner on Nov 6, 2020. It is now read-only.

accounts: clippy and style fixes #11443

Open
wants to merge 8 commits into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

vorot93
Copy link

@vorot93 vorot93 commented Feb 3, 2020

This is the initial batch of style fixes as suggested by clippy as well as the general patterns of modern Rust. A couple of notes:

  • This is based on all possible clippy hints including pedantic and nursery ones. I assembled a uniform blacklist of common lint occurrences that cannot (easily) be fixed which would be the same for all crates in the repo. This would ease its maintenance in the future.
  • Besides the fixes suggested by clippy, I also removed the match by reference semantics in favor of explicit pre-match borrowing (or as_ref helper method).

@parity-cla-bot
Copy link

It looks like @vorot93 signed our Contributor License Agreement. 👍

Many thanks,

Parity Technologies CLA Bot

vorot93 and others added 3 commits February 4, 2020 12:25
Co-Authored-By: Niklas Adolfsson <niklasadolfsson1@gmail.com>
Co-Authored-By: Niklas Adolfsson <niklasadolfsson1@gmail.com>
dst.insert(a)?;
Ok(address)
}).collect()
let mut out = Vec::with_capacity(accounts.len());
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I guess that technically the lint triggered this was map().filter() instead map_filter()?

Then you switch to a for loop instead because it was not possible to return the error in filter_map?

Copy link
Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Yes, I simply didn't want to untangle the mix of Option and Result. And in general the imperative approach seems to me much clearer than the map-and-collect of results. It also returns earlier (on first error) although I'm not sure if it's the desired behavior here.

Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

right, it seems that the actual implementation of KeyDirectory::insert always returns Ok but I don't know, let's ignore it for this PR.

iv.copy_from_slice(&wallet.encseed[..16]);

let mut ciphertext = vec![];
let mut ciphertext = Vec::new();
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This is not a clippy-lint, right?

Copy link
Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

it was not, I can drop this.

Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

It is fine for me, I like Vec::new better but let's keep it open so the others can see this too.

let mut out = Vec::with_capacity(accounts.len());
for account in accounts {
let address = account.address;
if existing_accounts.contains(&address) {
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

to have the same behavior as before

Suggested change
if existing_accounts.contains(&address) {
if !existing_accounts.contains(&address) {

@sorpaas sorpaas added A3-inprogress ⏳ Pull request is in progress. No review needed at this stage. M4-core ⛓ Core client code / Rust. labels Jul 29, 2020
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Labels
A3-inprogress ⏳ Pull request is in progress. No review needed at this stage. M4-core ⛓ Core client code / Rust.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

4 participants