Lint against empty cfg(any()/all())

[clubby789]

Detect usages of cfg(any()) and cfg(all()) and suggest the literal boolean equivalents. When --lint-rust-version is available, gate the diagnostic appropriately.
Will need to be updated for #158134

Implements the lint suggested in rust-lang/rfcs#3695 (Tracking: #131204)
Tracking issue: #157574

[rustbot]

Some changes occurred in compiler/rustc_attr_parsing

cc @jdonszelmann, @JonathanBrouwer

[rustbot]

r? @Kivooeo

rustbot has assigned @Kivooeo.
They will have a look at your PR within the next two weeks and either review your PR or reassign to another reviewer.

Use r? to explicitly pick a reviewer

Why was this reviewer chosen?

The reviewer was selected based on:

• Owners of files modified in this PR: compiler
• compiler expanded to 73 candidates
• Random selection from 19 candidates

[rustbot]

miri is developed in its own repository. If possible, consider making this change to rust-lang/miri instead.

cc @rust-lang/miri

[mejrs]

Does this lint fire if the cfg predicate is produced in a macro expansion? I can see some valid use cases for producing all() etc in a macro.

[clubby789]

Does this lint fire if the cfg predicate is produced in a macro expansion? I can see some valid use cases for producing all() etc in a macro.

No;

if list.is_empty() && !list.span.from_expansion() {

gates the emission.

[rustbot]

clippy is developed in its own repository. If possible, consider making this change to rust-lang/rust-clippy instead.

cc @rust-lang/clippy

[clubby789]

This does overlap somewhat with clippy::non_minimal_cfg

[rustbot]

Reminder, once the PR becomes ready for a review, use @rustbot ready.

[rustbot]

This PR was rebased onto a different main commit. Here's a range-diff highlighting what actually changed.

Rebasing is a normal part of keeping PRs up to date, so no action is needed—this note is just to help reviewers.

[JonathanBrouwer]

r=me after T-lang approves

View changes since this review