#3006 : Fixing for .get().unwrap().foo()

Author: ms2300

clippy_lints/src/methods.rs

@@ -1415,7 +1415,7 @@ fn lint_get_unwrap(cx: &LateContext<'_, '_>, expr: &hir::Expr, get_args: &[hir::
         ),
         "try this",
         format!(
-            "{}{}[{}]",
+            "({}{}[{}])",
             borrow_str,
             snippet(cx, get_args[0].span, "_"),
             snippet(cx, get_args[1].span, "_")

tests/ui/get_unwrap.rs

@@ -43,4 +43,9 @@ fn main() {
         *some_btreemap.get_mut(&1).unwrap() = 'b';
         *false_positive.get_mut(0).unwrap() = 1;
     }
+
+    { // Test `get().unwrap().foo()` and `get_mut().unwrap().bar()`
+        let _ = some_vec.get(0..1).unwrap().to_vec();
+        let _ = some_vec.get_mut(0..1).unwrap().to_vec();
+    }
 }

tests/ui/get_unwrap.stderr

@@ -2,63 +2,75 @@ error: called `.get().unwrap()` on a slice. Using `[]` is more clear and more co
   --> $DIR/get_unwrap.rs:27:17
    |
 27 |         let _ = boxed_slice.get(1).unwrap();
-   |                 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ help: try this: `&boxed_slice[1]`
+   |                 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ help: try this: `(&boxed_slice[1])`
    |
    = note: `-D clippy::get-unwrap` implied by `-D warnings`
 
 error: called `.get().unwrap()` on a slice. Using `[]` is more clear and more concise
   --> $DIR/get_unwrap.rs:28:17
    |
 28 |         let _ = some_slice.get(0).unwrap();
-   |                 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ help: try this: `&some_slice[0]`
+   |                 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ help: try this: `(&some_slice[0])`
 
 error: called `.get().unwrap()` on a Vec. Using `[]` is more clear and more concise
   --> $DIR/get_unwrap.rs:29:17
    |
 29 |         let _ = some_vec.get(0).unwrap();
-   |                 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ help: try this: `&some_vec[0]`
+   |                 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ help: try this: `(&some_vec[0])`
 
 error: called `.get().unwrap()` on a VecDeque. Using `[]` is more clear and more concise
   --> $DIR/get_unwrap.rs:30:17
    |
 30 |         let _ = some_vecdeque.get(0).unwrap();
-   |                 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ help: try this: `&some_vecdeque[0]`
+   |                 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ help: try this: `(&some_vecdeque[0])`
 
 error: called `.get().unwrap()` on a HashMap. Using `[]` is more clear and more concise
   --> $DIR/get_unwrap.rs:31:17
    |
 31 |         let _ = some_hashmap.get(&1).unwrap();
-   |                 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ help: try this: `&some_hashmap[&1]`
+   |                 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ help: try this: `(&some_hashmap[&1])`
 
 error: called `.get().unwrap()` on a BTreeMap. Using `[]` is more clear and more concise
   --> $DIR/get_unwrap.rs:32:17
    |
 32 |         let _ = some_btreemap.get(&1).unwrap();
-   |                 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ help: try this: `&some_btreemap[&1]`
+   |                 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ help: try this: `(&some_btreemap[&1])`
 
 error: called `.get_mut().unwrap()` on a slice. Using `[]` is more clear and more concise
   --> $DIR/get_unwrap.rs:37:10
    |
 37 |         *boxed_slice.get_mut(0).unwrap() = 1;
-   |          ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ help: try this: `&mut boxed_slice[0]`
+   |          ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ help: try this: `(&mut boxed_slice[0])`
 
 error: called `.get_mut().unwrap()` on a slice. Using `[]` is more clear and more concise
   --> $DIR/get_unwrap.rs:38:10
    |
 38 |         *some_slice.get_mut(0).unwrap() = 1;
-   |          ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ help: try this: `&mut some_slice[0]`
+   |          ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ help: try this: `(&mut some_slice[0])`
 
 error: called `.get_mut().unwrap()` on a Vec. Using `[]` is more clear and more concise
   --> $DIR/get_unwrap.rs:39:10
    |
 39 |         *some_vec.get_mut(0).unwrap() = 1;
-   |          ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ help: try this: `&mut some_vec[0]`
+   |          ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ help: try this: `(&mut some_vec[0])`
 
 error: called `.get_mut().unwrap()` on a VecDeque. Using `[]` is more clear and more concise
   --> $DIR/get_unwrap.rs:40:10
    |
 40 |         *some_vecdeque.get_mut(0).unwrap() = 1;
-   |          ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ help: try this: `&mut some_vecdeque[0]`
+   |          ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ help: try this: `(&mut some_vecdeque[0])`
 
-error: aborting due to 10 previous errors
+error: called `.get().unwrap()` on a Vec. Using `[]` is more clear and more concise
+  --> $DIR/get_unwrap.rs:48:17
+   |
+48 |         let _ = some_vec.get(0..1).unwrap().to_vec();
+   |                 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ help: try this: `(&some_vec[0..1])`
+
+error: called `.get_mut().unwrap()` on a Vec. Using `[]` is more clear and more concise
+  --> $DIR/get_unwrap.rs:49:17
+   |
+49 |         let _ = some_vec.get_mut(0..1).unwrap().to_vec();
+   |                 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ help: try this: `(&mut some_vec[0..1])`
+
+error: aborting due to 12 previous errors