Add new lints: [method_shadow_field, method_shadow_public_field]

[raydroplet]

Closes #1481

This is my first pull request. It implements the two lints suggested in the original thread.
The dogfood test was not passing, so I added an allow clause. It may be worth taking a look.

changelog: Add new lints [method_shadow_field] and [method_shadow_public_field] that warn when a method name shadows a struct or union field

[rustbot]

r? @llogiq

rustbot has assigned @llogiq.
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: 7 candidates
• 7 candidates expanded to 7 candidates
• Random selection from Jarcho, dswij, llogiq, samueltardieu

[github-actions]

Lintcheck changes for 364f24b

Lint	Added	Removed	Changed
clippy::method_shadow_field	1246	0	0
clippy::method_shadow_public_field	53	0	0

This comment will be updated if you push new changes

[llogiq]

I think the most salient thing is avoiding breaking public API. Otherwise I'd like to see more interaction tests (no matter whether they are linted or not – those tests document the limits of the lint).

View changes since this review

[rustbot]

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

[raydroplet]

@rustbot ready

[rustbot]

This PR was rebased onto a different master 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.

[rustbot]

☔ The latest upstream changes (possibly #16770) made this pull request unmergeable. Please resolve the merge conflicts.

[raydroplet]

@rustbot r? clippy