Extend doc

crates/ruff_linter/src/rules/ruff/rules/unnecessary_iterable_allocation_for_first_element.rs

@@ -11,14 +11,21 @@ use crate::checkers::ast::Checker;
 use crate::fix::snippet::SourceCodeSnippet;
 
 /// ## What it does
-/// Checks for uses of `list(...)[0]` that can be replaced with
-/// `next(iter(...))`.
+/// Checks the following constructs, all of which can be replaced by
+/// `next(iter(...))`:
+///
+/// - `list(...)[0]`
+/// - `tuple(...)[0]`
+/// - `list(i for i in ...)[0]`
+/// - `[i for i in ...][0]`
+/// - `list(...).pop(0)`
 ///
 /// ## Why is this bad?
-/// Calling `list(...)` will create a new list of the entire collection, which
-/// can be very expensive for large collections. If you only need the first
-/// element of the collection, you can use `next(...)` or `next(iter(...)` to
-/// lazily fetch the first element.
+/// Calling e.g. `list(...)` will create a new list of the entire collection,
+/// which can be very expensive for large collections. If you only need the
+/// first element of the collection, you can use `next(...)` or
+/// `next(iter(...)` to lazily fetch the first element. The same is true for
+/// the other constructs.
 ///
 /// ## Example
 /// ```python
@@ -33,14 +40,16 @@ use crate::fix::snippet::SourceCodeSnippet;
 /// ```
 ///
 /// ## Fix safety
-/// This rule's fix is marked as unsafe, as migrating from `list(...)[0]` to
-/// `next(iter(...))` can change the behavior of your program in two ways:
+/// This rule's fix is marked as unsafe, as migrating from e.g. `list(...)[0]`
+/// to `next(iter(...))` can change the behavior of your program in two ways:
 ///
-/// 1. First, `list(...)` will eagerly evaluate the entire collection, while
-///    `next(iter(...))` will only evaluate the first element. As such, any
-///    side effects that occur during iteration will be delayed.
-/// 2. Second, `list(...)[0]` will raise `IndexError` if the collection is
-///    empty, while `next(iter(...))` will raise `StopIteration`.
+/// 1. First, all above mentioned constructs will eagerly evaluate the entire
+///    collection, while `next(iter(...))` will only evaluate the first
+///    element. As such, any side effects that occur during iteration will be
+///    delayed.
+/// 2. Second, accessing members of a collection via square bracket notation
+///    `[0]` of the `pop()` function will raise `IndexError` if the collection
+///    is empty, while `next(iter(...))` will raise `StopIteration`.
 ///
 /// ## References
 /// - [Iterators and Iterables in Python: Run Efficient Iterations](https://realpython.com/python-iterators-iterables/#when-to-use-an-iterator-in-python)