Clippy lints / Restriction
Clippy lint · Restriction · checked with Clippy 0.1.99
clippy::pointer_format: pointer formatting detected
What it meansDetects pointer format as well as Debug formatting of raw pointers or function pointers or any types that have a derived Debug impl that recursively contains them. It is in the restriction group and off by default.
What you see
warning: pointer formatting detected --> main.rs:5:11 | 5 | println!("{:p}", foo); | ^^^^ | = help: for further information visit https://rust-lang.github.io/rust-clippy/stable/index.html#pointer_format = note: requested on the command line with `-W clippy::pointer-format`
Real output of Clippy 0.1.99 (Rust 1.99) on the example below. Names and line numbers in yours will differ.
Does it matter?
The addresses are only useful in very specific contexts, and certain projects may want to keep addresses of certain data structures or functions from prying hacker eyes as an additional line of security.
Lints that forbid language features for specific codebases (no unwrap, no indexing...). Off by default; pick them one by one, never the whole group.
How to fix it
Clippy does not fix this one automatically. Change the code by hand:
Flagged
let foo = &0_u32;
fn bar() {}
println!("{:p}", foo);
let _ = format!("{:?}", &(bar as fn()));
Turn it off, or on
It is off by default. To use it, set it to warn or deny:
Whole crate (Cargo.toml)
[lints.clippy]
pointer_format = "warn"In code
#![warn(clippy::pointer_format)]One run
cargo clippy -- -W clippy::pointer-formatThe [lints] table needs Rust 1.74 or newer. In a workspace, put it under [workspace.lints.clippy] and add [lints] workspace = true to each member.
Clippy's own documentation
What it does
Detects pointer format as well as Debug formatting of raw pointers or function pointers
or any types that have a derived Debug impl that recursively contains them.
Why restrict this?
The addresses are only useful in very specific contexts, and certain projects may want to keep addresses of certain data structures or functions from prying hacker eyes as an additional line of security.
Known problems
The lint currently only looks through derived Debug implementations. Checking whether a manual
implementation prints an address is left as an exercise to the next lint implementer.
Example
let foo = &0_u32;
fn bar() {}
println!("{:p}", foo);
let _ = format!("{:?}", &(bar as fn()));
From the Clippy lint list (0.1.99), part of the Rust project, MIT or Apache-2.0. Official entry.
Related lints
- unwrap_usedChecks for .unwrap() or .unwrap_err() calls on Results and .unwrap() call on Options
- module_name_repetitionsDetects public item names that are prefixed or suffixed by the containing public module’s name
- expect_usedChecks for .expect() or .expect_err() calls on Results and .expect() call on Options
- partial_pub_fieldsmixed usage of pub and non-pub fields
- pathbuf_init_then_pushChecks for calls to push immediately after creating a new PathBuf
- pattern_type_mismatchtype of pattern does not match the expression type
- precedence_bitsChecks for bit shifting operations combined with bit masking/combining operators and suggest using parentheses
- print_stderruse of `eprintln!`
- print_stdoutuse of `println!`
All 847 Clippy lints · Rust compiler errors · Cargo.toml checker
Up next
Related lintclippy::unwrap_usedChecks for .unwrap() or .unwrap_err() calls on Results and .unwrap() call on OptionsRead it next →Did this answer your question?