2010YOUY01 opened a new pull request, #18468: URL: https://github.com/apache/datafusion/pull/18468
## Which issue does this PR close? <!-- We generally require a GitHub issue to be filed for all bug fixes and enhancements and this helps us generate change logs for our releases. You can link an issue to this PR using the GitHub syntax. For example `Closes #123` indicates that this PR will close issue #123. --> An initial attempt towards https://github.com/apache/datafusion/issues/18467 ## Rationale for this change <!-- Why are you proposing this change? If this is already explained clearly in the issue then this section is not needed. Explaining clearly why changes are proposed helps reviewers understand your changes and offer better suggestions for fixes. --> ### Rationale for the additional lint rule `clippy::needless_pass_by_value` There is a clippy lint rule that is not turned on by the current strictness level in CI: https://rust-lang.github.io/rust-clippy/master/index.html#needless_pass_by_value Note it has the `Clippy` category `pedantic`, and its description is `lints which are rather strict or have occasional false positives` from https://doc.rust-lang.org/nightly/clippy It seems we have been suffering from the excessive copying issue for quite some time, and @alamb is on the front line now https://github.com/apache/datafusion/issues/18413. I think this extra lint rule is able to help. ### Implementation plan This PR only enables this rule in `datafusion-common` package, and apply `#[allow(clippy::needless_pass_by_value)]` for all violations. If this PR makes sense, we can open a tracking issue and roll out this check to the remaining workspace packages. At least this can help prevent new inefficient patterns and identify existing issues that we can fix gradually. ## What changes are included in this PR? <!-- There is no need to duplicate the description in the issue here but it is sometimes worth providing a summary of the individual changes in this PR. --> ## Are these changes tested? <!-- We typically require tests for all PRs in order to: 1. Prevent the code from being accidentally broken by subsequent changes 2. Serve as another way to document the expected behavior of the code If tests are not included in your PR, please explain why (for example, are they covered by existing tests)? --> ## Are there any user-facing changes? <!-- If there are user-facing changes then we may require documentation to be updated before approving the PR. --> <!-- If there are any breaking changes to public APIs, please add the `api change` label. --> -- This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the URL above to go to the specific comment. To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: [email protected] --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
