Merge pull request #3490 from phansch/extract_single_match_else_ui_test

Extract single_match_else UI test

clippy_lints/src/matches.rs

@@ -45,24 +45,37 @@ declare_clippy_lint! {
     "a match statement with a single nontrivial arm (i.e. where the other arm is `_ => {}`) instead of `if let`"
 }
 
-/// **What it does:** Checks for matches with a two arms where an `if let` will
+/// **What it does:** Checks for matches with a two arms where an `if let else` will
 /// usually suffice.
 ///
 /// **Why is this bad?** Just readability – `if let` nests less than a `match`.
 ///
 /// **Known problems:** Personal style preferences may differ.
 ///
 /// **Example:**
+///
+/// Using `match`:
+///
 /// ```rust
 /// match x {
 ///     Some(ref foo) => bar(foo),
 ///     _ => bar(other_ref),
 /// }
 /// ```
+///
+/// Using `if let` with `else`:
+///
+/// ```rust
+/// if let Some(ref foo) = x {
+///     bar(foo);
+/// } else {
+///     bar(other_ref);
+/// }
+/// ```
 declare_clippy_lint! {
     pub SINGLE_MATCH_ELSE,
     pedantic,
-    "a match statement with a two arms where the second arm's pattern is a wildcard instead of `if let`"
+    "a match statement with a two arms where the second arm's pattern is a placeholder instead of a specific match pattern"
 }
 
 /// **What it does:** Checks for matches where all arms match a reference,

tests/ui/matches.rs

@@ -14,26 +14,12 @@
 
 #![warn(clippy::all)]
 #![allow(unused, clippy::redundant_pattern_matching)]
-#![warn(clippy::single_match_else, clippy::match_same_arms)]
+#![warn(clippy::match_same_arms)]
 
-enum ExprNode {
-    ExprAddrOf,
-    Butterflies,
-    Unicorns,
-}
-
-static NODE: ExprNode = ExprNode::Unicorns;
 
 fn dummy() {
 }
 
-fn unwrap_addr() -> Option<&'static ExprNode> {
-    match ExprNode::Butterflies {
-        ExprNode::ExprAddrOf => Some(&NODE),
-        _ => { let x = 5; None },
-    }
-}
-
 fn ref_pats() {
     {
         let v = &Some(0);