<!--
Thank you for contributing to Ruff! To help us out with reviewing,
please consider the following:
- Does this pull request include a summary of the change? (See below.)
- Does this pull request include a descriptive title?
- Does this pull request include references to any relevant issues?
-->
## Summary
Fixes parentheses not being stripped in C401. Pretty much the same as
#11607 which fixed it for C400.
## Test Plan
`cargo nextest run`
## Summary
This fixes the infinite loop reported in #12897, where an
`unused-import` that is undefined at the scope of `__all__` is "fixed"
by adding it to `__all__` repeatedly. These changes make it so that only
imports in the global scope will be suggested to add to `__all__` and
the unused local import is simply removed.
## Test Plan
Added a CLI integration test that sets up the same module structure as
the original report
Closes#12897
---------
Co-authored-by: Alex Waygood <Alex.Waygood@Gmail.com>
## Summary
Resolves#9467
Parse quoted annotations as if the string content is inside parenthesis.
With this logic `x` and `y` in this example are equal:
```python
y: """
int |
str
"""
z: """(
int |
str
)
"""
```
Also this rule only applies to triple
quotes([link](https://github.com/python/typing-council/issues/9#issuecomment-1890808610)).
This PR is based on the
[comments](https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/issues/9467#issuecomment-2579180991)
on the issue.
I did one extra change, since we don't want any indentation tokens I am
setting the `State::Other` as the initial state of the Lexer.
Remaining work:
- [x] Add a test case for red-knot.
- [x] Add more tests.
## Test Plan
Added a test which previously failed because quoted annotation contained
indentation.
Added an mdtest for red-knot.
Updated previous test.
Co-authored-by: Dhruv Manilawala <dhruvmanila@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Micha Reiser <micha@reiser.io>
## Summary
Allow links to issues that appear on the same line as the TODO
directive, if they conform to the format that VSCode's GitHub PR
extension produces.
Revival of #9627 (the branch was stale enough that rebasing was a lot
harder than just making the changes anew). Credit should go to the
author of that PR though.
Closes#8061
Co-authored-by: Martin Bernstorff <martinbernstorff@gmail.com>
## Summary
The initial purpose was to fix#15043, where code like this:
```python
from fastapi import FastAPI, Query
app = FastAPI()
@app.get("/test")
def handler(echo: str = Query("")):
return echo
```
was being fixed to the invalid code below:
```python
from typing import Annotated
from fastapi import FastAPI, Query
app = FastAPI()
@app.get("/test")
def handler(echo: Annotated[str, Query("")]): # changed
return echo
```
As @MichaReiser pointed out, the correct fix is:
```python
from typing import Annotated
from fastapi import FastAPI, Query
app = FastAPI()
@app.get("/test")
def handler(echo: Annotated[str, Query()] = ""): # changed
return echo
```
After fixing the issue for `Query`, I realized that other classes like
`Path`, `Body`, `Cookie`, `Header`, `File`, and `Form` also looked
susceptible to this issue. The last few commits should handle these too,
which I think means this will also close#12913.
I had to reorder the arguments to the `do_stuff` test case because the
new fix removes some default argument values (eg for `Path`:
`some_path_param: str = Path()` becomes `some_path_param: Annotated[str,
Path()]`).
There's also #14484 related to this rule. I'm happy to take a stab at
that here or in a follow up PR too.
## Test Plan
`cargo test`
I also checked the fixed output with `uv run --with fastapi
FAST002_0.py`, but it required making a bunch of additional changes to
the test file that I wasn't sure we wanted in this PR.
---------
Co-authored-by: Micha Reiser <micha@reiser.io>
## Summary
Implements upstream diagnostics `PT029`, `PT030`, `PT031` that function
as pytest.warns corollaries of `PT010`, `PT011`, `PT012` respectively.
Most of the implementation and documentation is designed to mirror those
existing diagnostics.
Closes#14239
## Test Plan
Tests for `PT029`, `PT030`, `PT031` largely copied from `PT010`,
`PT011`, `PT012` respectively.
`cargo nextest run`
---------
Co-authored-by: Charlie Marsh <charlie.r.marsh@gmail.com>
<!--
Thank you for contributing to Ruff! To help us out with reviewing,
please consider the following:
- Does this pull request include a summary of the change? (See below.)
- Does this pull request include a descriptive title?
- Does this pull request include references to any relevant issues?
-->
## Summary
Fix infinite loop issue reported here #15248.
The issue was caused by the break inside the if block, which caused the
flow to exit in an unforeseen way. This caused other issues, eventually
leading to an infinite loop.
Resolves#15248. Resolves#15336.
## Test Plan
Added failing code to fixture.
---------
Co-authored-by: Micha Reiser <micha@reiser.io>
Co-authored-by: dylwil3 <dylwil3@gmail.com>
When removing `int` in calls like `int(expr)` we may need to keep
parentheses around `expr` even when it is a function call or subscript,
since there may be newlines in between the function/value name and the
opening parentheses/bracket of the argument.
This PR implements that logic.
Closes#15263
---------
Co-authored-by: Charlie Marsh <charlie.r.marsh@gmail.com>
Note: `PLW0101` remains in testing rather than preview, so this PR does
not modify any public behavior (hence the title beginning with
`internal` rather than `pylint`, for the sake of the changelog.)
Fixes an error in the processing of `try` statements in the control flow
graph builder.
When processing a try statement, the block following a `return` was
forced to point to the `finally` block. However, if the return was _in_
the `finally` block, this caused the block to point to itself. In the
case where the whole `try-finally` statement was also included inside of
a loop, this caused an infinite loop in the builder for the control flow
graph as it attempted to resolve edges.
Closes#15248
## Test function
### Source
```python
def l():
while T:
try:
while ():
if 3:
break
finally:
return
```
### Control Flow Graph
```mermaid
flowchart TD
start(("Start"))
return(("End"))
block0[["`*(empty)*`"]]
block1[["Loop continue"]]
block2["return\n"]
block3[["Loop continue"]]
block4["break\n"]
block5["if 3:
break\n"]
block6["while ():
if 3:
break\n"]
block7[["Exception raised"]]
block8["try:
while ():
if 3:
break
finally:
return\n"]
block9["while T:
try:
while ():
if 3:
break
finally:
return\n"]
start --> block9
block9 -- "T" --> block8
block9 -- "else" --> block0
block8 -- "Exception raised" --> block7
block8 -- "else" --> block6
block7 --> block2
block6 -- "()" --> block5
block6 -- "else" --> block2
block5 -- "3" --> block4
block5 -- "else" --> block3
block4 --> block2
block3 --> block6
block2 --> return
block1 --> block9
block0 --> return
```
## Summary
Adds `class-as-data-structure` rule (`B903`). Also compare pylint's `too-few-public-methods` (`PLR0903`).
Took some creative liberty with this by allowing the class to have any
decorators or base classes. There are years-old issues on pylint that
don't approve of the strictness when it comes to these things.
Especially considering that dataclass is a decorator and namedtuple _can
be_ a base class. I feel ignoring those explicitly is redundant all
things considered, but it's not a hill I'm willing to die on!
See: #970
## Test Plan
`cargo test`
---------
Co-authored-by: Micha Reiser <micha@reiser.io>
Co-authored-by: dylwil3 <dylwil3@gmail.com>
## Summary
This PR re-introduces the control-flow graph implementation which was
first introduced in #5384, and then removed in #9463 due to not being
feature complete. Mainly, it lacked the ability to process
`try`-`except` blocks, along with some more minor bugs.
Closes#8958 and #8959 and #14881.
## Overview of Changes
I will now highlight the major changes implemented in this PR, in order
of implementation.
1. Introduced a post-processing step in loop handling to find any
`continue` or `break` statements within the loop body and redirect them
appropriately.
2. Introduced a loop-continue block which is always placed at the end of
loop blocks, and ensures proper looping regardless of the internal logic
of the block. This resolves#8958.
3. Implemented `try` processing with the following logic (resolves
#8959):
1. In the example below the cfg first encounters a conditional
`ExceptionRaised` forking if an exception was (or will be) raised in the
try block. This is not possible to know (except for trivial cases) so we
assume both paths can be taken unconditionally.
2. Going down the `try` path the cfg goes `try`->`else`->`finally`
unconditionally.
3. Going down the `except` path the cfg will meet several conditional
`ExceptionCaught` which fork depending on the nature of the exception
caught. Again there's no way to know which exceptions may be raised so
both paths are assumed to be taken unconditionally.
4. If none of the exception blocks catch the exception then the cfg
terminates by raising a new exception.
5. A post-processing step is also implemented to redirect any `raises`
or `returns` within the blocks appropriately.
```python
def func():
try:
print("try")
except Exception:
print("Exception")
except OtherException as e:
print("OtherException")
else:
print("else")
finally:
print("finally")
```
```mermaid
flowchart TD
start(("Start"))
return(("End"))
block0[["`*(empty)*`"]]
block1["print(#quot;finally#quot;)\n"]
block2["print(#quot;else#quot;)\n"]
block3["print(#quot;try#quot;)\n"]
block4[["Exception raised"]]
block5["print(#quot;OtherException#quot;)\n"]
block6["try:
print(#quot;try#quot;)
except Exception:
print(#quot;Exception#quot;)
except OtherException as e:
print(#quot;OtherException#quot;)
else:
print(#quot;else#quot;)
finally:
print(#quot;finally#quot;)\n"]
block7["print(#quot;Exception#quot;)\n"]
block8["try:
print(#quot;try#quot;)
except Exception:
print(#quot;Exception#quot;)
except OtherException as e:
print(#quot;OtherException#quot;)
else:
print(#quot;else#quot;)
finally:
print(#quot;finally#quot;)\n"]
block9["try:
print(#quot;try#quot;)
except Exception:
print(#quot;Exception#quot;)
except OtherException as e:
print(#quot;OtherException#quot;)
else:
print(#quot;else#quot;)
finally:
print(#quot;finally#quot;)\n"]
start --> block9
block9 -- "Exception raised" --> block8
block9 -- "else" --> block3
block8 -- "Exception" --> block7
block8 -- "else" --> block6
block7 --> block1
block6 -- "OtherException" --> block5
block6 -- "else" --> block4
block5 --> block1
block4 --> return
block3 --> block2
block2 --> block1
block1 --> block0
block0 --> return
```
6. Implemented `with` processing with the following logic:
1. `with` statements have no conditional execution (apart from the
hidden logic handling the enter and exit), so the block is assumed to
execute unconditionally.
2. The one exception is that exceptions raised within the block may
result in control flow resuming at the end of the block. Since it is not
possible know if an exception will be raised, or if it will be handled
by the context manager, we assume that execution always continues after
`with` blocks even if the blocks contain `raise` or `return` statements.
This is handled in a post-processing step.
## Test Plan
Additional test fixtures and control-flow fixtures were added.
---------
Co-authored-by: Micha Reiser <micha@reiser.io>
Co-authored-by: dylwil3 <dylwil3@gmail.com>
