Email me

Clippy lints / Complexity

Clippy lint · Complexity · checked with Clippy 0.1.99

clippy::redundant_at_rest_pattern: using a rest pattern to bind an entire slice to a local

What it meansChecks for [all @ ..] patterns. It is in the complexity group and warns by default.

What you see

warning: using a rest pattern to bind an entire slice to a local
 --> main.rs:3:8
  |
3 | if let [all @ ..] = &*v {
  |        ^^^^^^^^^^ help: this is better represented with just the binding: `all`
  |
  = help: for further information visit https://rust-lang.github.io/rust-clippy/stable/index.html#redundant_at_rest_pattern
  = note: `#[warn(clippy::redundant_at_rest_pattern)]` on by default

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?

In all cases, all works fine and can often make code simpler, as you possibly won’t need to convert from say a Vec to a slice by dereferencing.

Code that does something simple in a complicated way. Warns by default.

How to fix it

Clippy can fix this one for you: run cargo clippy --fix (add --allow-dirty if you have uncommitted changes). Review the diff before you commit.

Flagged

if let [all @ ..] = &*v {
    // NOTE: Type is a slice here
    println!("all elements: {all:#?}");
}

Write this instead

if let all = v {
    // NOTE: Type is a `Vec` here
    println!("all elements: {all:#?}");
}
// or
println!("all elements: {v:#?}");

Turn it off, or on

Allow it where it does not fit your code, as narrowly as you can:

On one item

#[allow(clippy::redundant_at_rest_pattern)]
fn my_function() { /* ... */ }

Whole crate (Cargo.toml)

[lints.clippy]
redundant_at_rest_pattern = "allow"

One run

cargo clippy -- -A clippy::redundant-at-rest-pattern

The [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.

Complexitygroup
warndefault level
yesfixed by cargo clippy --fix
1.72.0added in Rust

Clippy's own documentation

What it does

Checks for [all @ ..] patterns.

Why is this bad?

In all cases, all works fine and can often make code simpler, as you possibly won’t need to convert from say a Vec to a slice by dereferencing.

Example

if let [all @ ..] = &*v {
    // NOTE: Type is a slice here
    println!("all elements: {all:#?}");
}

Use instead:

if let all = v {
    // NOTE: Type is a `Vec` here
    println!("all elements: {all:#?}");
}
// or
println!("all elements: {v:#?}");

From the Clippy lint list (0.1.99), part of the Rust project, MIT or Apache-2.0. Official entry.

Related lints

All 847 Clippy lints · Rust compiler errors · Cargo.toml checker

Up next

Related lintclippy::too_many_argumentsChecks for functions with too many parametersRead it next →

Did this answer your question?

Get the receipts by email.

What my AI agents tried this week, with the real numbers: what worked, what flopped, what made money. One email when there is something worth reading.

No spam, never sold. Every email has a one-click unsubscribe.

Popular in the shop

All 124 tools →

Browse: Bundles and kitsHome, family and schoolMoney and businessAI toolsSports and fitnessMaking and hobbiesFood and drinkIndie dev and launchTrading and quant

Free: Landing page teardown iPhone app cost calculator LLM API cost calculator Paid online: $49 Launch Check App builds Articles FAQ