Analyze HIC++ and figure out if we are missing some important lints

http://www.codingstandard.com/section/index/

This document defines a set of rules for the production of high quality C++ code1. The guiding principles of this standard are maintenance, portability, readability and robustness. Justification with examples of compliant and/or non-compliant code are provided for each rule. Each rule shall be enforced unless a formal deviation is recorded (see Section 0.6).

This standard adopts the view that restrictions should be placed on the use of the ISO C++ language (see 1.1.1) without sacrificing its core flexibility. This approach allows for the creation of robust and easy to maintain programs while minimizing problems created either by compiler diversity, different programming styles, or dangerous/confusing aspects of the language.

Without applying good coding standards, programmers may write code that is prone to bugs or difficult for someone else to pick up and maintain.

A combination of techniques has to be applied to achieve high integrity software: e.g. requirements management and coverage testing. Only a few of such techniques are programming language specific, of which language subsetting is widely regarded as an effective and scalable method. When rigorously enforced, and coupled with language agnostic techniques, it can facilitate production of high integrity C++ code.

Start by reviewing the linked HIC++ coding standard and comparing its rules with the existing rust-clippy lint set. Identify any important C++-standard-inspired checks that Clippy lacks, then document concrete candidate lints and their rationale; the issue does not name source files or tests.