Explaining why something is bad is still necessary if you rely on automated code review. Clippy does this, with specific codes for specific (potential) problems that the linter catches. You can learn a lot about patterns in Rust by just reading through the bad patterns and read their suggested alternatives.
I fully agree, but then it would be integrated with Clippy or in a wiki with a page per code (like shellcheck).
The document in this post is helpful because it does the first step of explaining the rationals, that can then eventually be automated (and then/copy pasted in the explanations).
I agree with you all. Bake it into clippy or make a different clippy aka seclippy. Also, I appreciate the docs so I understand why with examples. Also make a attribute that blocks some of these things
According to French Wikipedia, one of the names for Clippy in French is Trombine. Given the other user mentioned that it means "face", and given trombone is, I believe, a paper clip (my French education unfortunately did not get this far), I suspect it's used as a kind of cute pun thing.
Kind of like how "Clippy" is obviously derived from the word "paperclip", but has slightly cuter and more friendly connotations. (Except for those experienced with Clippy, who may have other connotations at this point...)
