Tracking Issue for NOOP_METHOD_CALL lint

[Aaron1011]

This is a tracking issue for the NOOP_METHOD_CALL lint (rust-lang/lang-team#67)

About tracking issues

Tracking issues are used to record the overall progress of implementation.
They are also used as hubs connecting to other relevant issues, e.g., bugs or open design questions.
A tracking issue is however not meant for large scale discussion, questions, or bug reports about a feature.
Instead, open a dedicated issue for the specific matter and add the relevant feature gate label.

Steps

• Implement the initial version of the lint (Implement NOOP_METHOD_CALL lint #80723)
• Extend this to more complicated cases, like ToOwned
• Make the lint warn-by-default

Known issues:

• The NOOP_METHOD_CALL lint fails to run if a MIR error occurs #91536

Unresolved Questions

• Should we lint when a method is called via UFCS? This could be interpreted as the user explicitly choosing to call a no-op method.
• Should we allow external crates to mark their own methods as being 'noop-ops', so that this lint can fire on third-party methods?

Implementation history

• Initial version implemented in Implement NOOP_METHOD_CALL lint #80723

[safinaskar]

It seems the lint intersects with suspicious_double_ref_op ( https://doc.rust-lang.org/beta/nightly-rustc/rustc_lint/noop_method_call/static.SUSPICIOUS_DOUBLE_REF_OP.html )

[safinaskar]

Also, it seems NOOP_METHOD_CALL is now warn-by-default