## Summary
This PR is a collaboration with @AlexWaygood from our pairing session
last Friday.
The main goal here is removing `ruff_linter::message::OldDiagnostic` in
favor of
using `ruff_db::diagnostic::Diagnostic` directly. This involved a few
major steps:
- Transferring the fields
- Transferring the methods and trait implementations, where possible
- Converting some constructor methods to free functions
- Moving the `SecondaryCode` struct
- Updating the method names
I'm hoping that some of the methods, especially those in the
`expect_ruff_*`
family, won't be necessary long-term, but I avoided trying to replace
them
entirely for now to keep the already-large diff a bit smaller.
### Related refactors
Alex and I noticed a few refactoring opportunities while looking at the
code,
specifically the very similar implementations for
`create_parse_diagnostic`,
`create_unsupported_syntax_diagnostic`, and
`create_semantic_syntax_diagnostic`.
We combined these into a single generic function, which I then copied
into
`ruff_linter::message` with some small changes and a TODO to combine
them in the
future.
I also deleted the `DisplayParseErrorType` and `TruncateAtNewline` types
for
reporting parse errors. These were added in #4124, I believe to work
around the
error messages from LALRPOP. Removing these didn't affect any tests, so
I think
they were unnecessary now that we fully control the error messages from
the
parser.
On a more minor note, I factored out some calls to the
`OldDiagnostic::filename`
(now `Diagnostic::expect_ruff_filename`) function to avoid repeatedly
allocating
`String`s in some places.
### Snapshot changes
The `show_statistics_syntax_errors` integration test changed because the
`OldDiagnostic::name` method used `syntax-error` instead of
`invalid-syntax`
like in ty. I think this (`--statistics`) is one of the only places we
actually
use this name for syntax errors, so I hope this is okay. An alternative
is to
use `syntax-error` in ty too.
The other snapshot changes are from removing this code, as discussed on
[Discord](1388252408):
34052a1185/crates/ruff_linter/src/message/mod.rs (L128-L135)
I think both of these are technically breaking changes, but they only
affect
syntax errors and are very narrow in scope, while also pretty
substantially
simplifying the refactor, so I hope they're okay to include in a patch
release.
## Test plan
Existing tests, with the adjustments mentioned above
---------
Co-authored-by: Alex Waygood <Alex.Waygood@Gmail.com>
## Summary
I think this should be the last step before combining `OldDiagnostic`
and `ruff_db::Diagnostic`. We can't store a `NoqaCode` on
`ruff_db::Diagnostic`, so I converted the `noqa_code` field to an
`Option<String>` and then propagated this change to all of the callers.
I tried to use `&str` everywhere it was possible, so I think the
remaining `to_string` calls are necessary. I spent some time trying to
convert _everything_ to `&str` but ran into lifetime issues, especially
in the `FixTable`. Maybe we can take another look at that if it causes a
performance regression, but hopefully these paths aren't too hot. We
also avoid some `to_string` calls, so it might even out a bit too.
## Test Plan
Existing tests
---------
Co-authored-by: Micha Reiser <micha@reiser.io>
Added `cls.__dict__.get('__annotations__')` check for Python 3.10+ and
Python < 3.10 with `typing-extensions` enabled.
Closes#17853
<!--
Thank you for contributing to Ruff/ty! 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? (Please prefix
with `[ty]` for ty pull
requests.)
- Does this pull request include references to any relevant issues?
-->
## Summary
Added `cls.__dict__.get('__annotations__')` check for Python 3.10+ and
Python < 3.10 with `typing-extensions` enabled.
## Test Plan
`cargo test`
---------
Co-authored-by: Brent Westbrook <36778786+ntBre@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Micha Reiser <micha@reiser.io>
Summary
--
Deprecates PD901 as part of #7710. I don't feel particularly strongly
about this one, though I have certainly used `df` as a dataframe name in
the past, just going through the open issues in the 0.12 milestone.
Test Plan
--
N/a
## Summary
- Stabilizes RUF058 (starmap-zip) rule by changing it from Preview to
Stable
- Migrates test cases from preview_rules to main rules function
- Updates snapshots accordingly and removes old preview snapshots
## Test plan
- ✅ Migrated tests from preview to main test function
- ✅ `make check` passes
- ✅ `make test` passes
- ✅ `make citest` passes (no leftover snapshots)
## Rule Documentation
- [Test
file](https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/blob/main/crates/ruff_linter/src/rules/ruff/mod.rs#L103-L104)
- [Rule documentation](https://docs.astral.sh/ruff/rules/starmap-zip/)
## Summary
Stabilizes the UP049 rule (private-type-parameter) by moving it from
Preview to Stable.
UP049 detects and fixes the use of private type parameters (those with
leading underscores) in PEP 695 generic classes and functions.
## Test plan
- Verified that UP049 tests pass:
`crates/ruff_linter/src/rules/pyupgrade/mod.rs`
- Ran full test suite with `make test`
- Confirmed that no test migration was needed as UP049 was already in
the main `rules` test function
## Rule documentation
https://docs.astral.sh/ruff/rules/private-type-parameter/
This PR stabilizes the FURB162 rule by moving it from preview to stable
status for the 0.12.0 release.
## Summary
- **Rule**: FURB162 (`fromisoformat-replace-z`)
- **Purpose**: Detects unnecessary timezone replacement operations when
calling `datetime.fromisoformat()`
- **Change**: Move from `RuleGroup::Preview` to `RuleGroup::Stable` in
`codes.rs`
## Verification Links
- **Tests**:
[refurb/mod.rs](https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/blob/main/crates/ruff_linter/src/rules/refurb/mod.rs#L54)
- Confirms FURB162 has only standard tests, no preview-specific test
cases
- **Documentation**:
https://docs.astral.sh/ruff/rules/fromisoformat-replace-z/ - Current
documentation shows preview status that will be automatically updated
This PR stabilizes the RUF053 rule by moving it from preview to stable
status for the 0.12.0 release.
## Summary
- **Rule**: RUF053 (`class-with-mixed-type-vars`)
- **Purpose**: Detects classes that have both PEP 695 type parameter
lists while also inheriting from `typing.Generic`
- **Change**: Move from `RuleGroup::Preview` to `RuleGroup::Stable` in
`codes.rs` and migrate preview tests to stable tests
## Verification Links
- **Tests**:
[ruff/mod.rs](https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/blob/main/crates/ruff_linter/src/rules/ruff/mod.rs#L98)
- Shows RUF053 moved from preview_rules to main rules test function
- **Documentation**:
https://docs.astral.sh/ruff/rules/class-with-mixed-type-vars/ - Current
documentation shows preview status that will be automatically updated
<!--
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?
-->
This PR aims to close#16605.
## Summary
This PR introduces a new rule (`RUF061`) that detects non-contextmanager
usage of `pytest.raises`, `pytest.warns`, and `pytest.deprecated_call`.
This pattern is discouraged and [was proposed in
flake8-pytest-style](https://github.com/m-burst/flake8-pytest-style/pull/332),
but the corresponding PR has been open for over a month without
activity.
Additionally, this PR provides an unsafe fix for simple cases where the
non-contextmanager form can be transformed into the context manager
form. Examples of supported patterns are listed in `RUF061_raises.py`,
`RUF061_warns.py`, and `RUF061_deprecated_call.py` test files.
The more complex case from the original issue (involving two separate
statements):
```python
excinfo = pytest.raises(ValueError, int, "hello")
assert excinfo.match("^invalid literal")
```
is getting fixed like this:
```python
with pytest.raises(ValueError) as excinfo:
int("hello")
assert excinfo.match("^invalid literal")
```
Putting match in the raises call requires multi-statement
transformation, which I am not sure how to implement.
## Test Plan
<!-- How was it tested? -->
New test files were added to cover various usages of the
non-contextmanager form of pytest.raises, warns, and deprecated_call.
## Summary
As the title says, this PR removes the `Message::to_rule` method by
replacing related uses of `Rule` with `NoqaCode` (or the rule's name in
the case of the cache). Where it seemed a `Rule` was really needed, we
convert back to the `Rule` by parsing either the rule name (with
`str::parse`) or the `NoqaCode` (with `Rule::from_code`).
I thought this was kind of like cheating and that it might not resolve
this part of Micha's
[comment](https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/pull/18391#issuecomment-2933764275):
> because we can't add Rule to Diagnostic or **have it anywhere in our
shared rendering logic**
but after looking again, the only remaining `Rule` conversion in
rendering code is for the SARIF output format. The other two non-test
`Rule` conversions are for caching and writing a fix summary, which I
don't think fall into the shared rendering logic. That leaves the SARIF
format as the only real problem, but maybe we can delay that for now.
The motivation here is that we won't be able to store a `Rule` on the
new `Diagnostic` type, but we should be able to store a `NoqaCode`,
likely as a string.
## Test Plan
Existing tests
##
[Benchmarks](https://codspeed.io/astral-sh/ruff/branches/brent%2Fremove-to-rule)
Almost no perf regression, only -1% on
`linter/default-rules[large/dataset.py]`.
---------
Co-authored-by: Micha Reiser <micha@reiser.io>
## Summary
Implements `use-maxsplit-arg` (`PLC0207`)
https://pylint.readthedocs.io/en/latest/user_guide/messages/convention/use-maxsplit-arg.html
> Emitted when accessing only the first or last element of str.split().
The first and last element can be accessed by using str.split(sep,
maxsplit=1)[0] or str.rsplit(sep, maxsplit=1)[-1] instead.
This is part of https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/issues/970
## Test Plan
`cargo test`
Additionally compared Ruff output to Pylint:
```
pylint --disable=all --enable=use-maxsplit-arg crates/ruff_linter/resources/test/fixtures/pylint/missing_maxsplit_arg.py
cargo run -p ruff -- check crates/ruff_linter/resources/test/fixtures/pylint/missing_maxsplit_arg.py --no-cache --select PLC0207
```
---------
Co-authored-by: Brent Westbrook <brentrwestbrook@gmail.com>
## Summary
This PR unifies the ruff `Message` enum variants for syntax errors and
rule violations into a single `Message` struct consisting of a shared
`db::Diagnostic` and some additional, optional fields used for some rule
violations.
This version of `Message` is nearly a drop-in replacement for
`ruff_diagnostics::Diagnostic`, which is the next step I have in mind
for the refactor.
I think this is also a useful checkpoint because we could possibly add
some of these optional fields to the new `Diagnostic` type. I think
we've previously discussed wanting support for `Fix`es, but the other
fields seem less relevant, so we may just need to preserve the `Message`
wrapper for a bit longer.
## Test plan
Existing tests
---------
Co-authored-by: Micha Reiser <micha@reiser.io>
## Summary
Introducing a new rule based on discussions in #15732 and #15729 that
checks for unnecessary in with empty collections.
I called it in_empty_collection and gave the rule number RUF060.
Rule is in preview group.
<!--
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
<!-- What's the purpose of the change? What does it do, and why? -->
As discussed in
https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/issues/14626#issuecomment-2766146129,
we're to separate suggested changes from required changes.
The following symbols have been moved to AIR311 from AIR301. They still
work in Airflow 3.0, but they're suggested to be changed as they're
expected to be removed in a future version.
* arguments
* `airflow..DAG | dag`
* `sla_miss_callback`
* operators
* `sla`
* name
* `airflow.Dataset] | [airflow.datasets.Dataset` → `airflow.sdk.Asset`
* `airflow.datasets, rest @ ..`
* `DatasetAlias` → `airflow.sdk.AssetAlias`
* `DatasetAll` → `airflow.sdk.AssetAll`
* `DatasetAny` → `airflow.sdk.AssetAny`
* `expand_alias_to_datasets` → `airflow.sdk.expand_alias_to_assets`
* `metadata.Metadata` → `airflow.sdk.Metadata`
<!--airflow.models.baseoperator-->
* `airflow.models.baseoperator.chain` → `airflow.sdk.chain`
* `airflow.models.baseoperator.chain_linear` →
`airflow.sdk.chain_linear`
* `airflow.models.baseoperator.cross_downstream` →
`airflow.sdk.cross_downstream`
* `airflow.models.baseoperatorlink.BaseOperatorLink` →
`airflow.sdk.definitions.baseoperatorlink.BaseOperatorLink`
* `airflow.timetables, rest @ ..`
* `datasets.DatasetOrTimeSchedule` → *
`airflow.timetables.assets.AssetOrTimeSchedule`
* `airflow.utils, rest @ ..`
<!--airflow.utils.dag_parsing_context-->
* `dag_parsing_context.get_parsing_context` →
`airflow.sdk.get_parsing_context`
## Test Plan
<!-- How was it tested? -->
The test fixture has been updated acccordingly
<!--
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
<!-- What's the purpose of the change? What does it do, and why? -->
As discussed in
https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/issues/14626#issuecomment-2766146129,
we're to separate suggested changes from required changes.
The following symbols has been moved to AIR312 from AIR302. They still
work in Airflow 3.0, but they're suggested to be changed as they're
expected to be removed in future version
```python
from airflow.hooks.filesystem import FSHook
from airflow.hooks.package_index import PackageIndexHook
from airflow.hooks.subprocess import (SubprocessHook, SubprocessResult, working_directory)
from airflow.operators.bash import BashOperator
from airflow.operators.datetime import BranchDateTimeOperator, target_times_as_dates
from airflow.operators.trigger_dagrun import TriggerDagRunLink, TriggerDagRunOperator
from airflow.operators.empty import EmptyOperator
from airflow.operators.latest_only import LatestOnlyOperator
from airflow.operators.python import (BranchPythonOperator, PythonOperator, PythonVirtualenvOperator, ShortCircuitOperator)
from airflow.operators.weekday import BranchDayOfWeekOperator
from airflow.sensors.date_time import DateTimeSensor, DateTimeSensorAsync
from airflow.sensors.external_task import ExternalTaskMarker, ExternalTaskSensor, ExternalTaskSensorLink
from airflow.sensors.filesystem import FileSensor
from airflow.sensors.time_sensor import TimeSensor, TimeSensorAsync
from airflow.sensors.time_delta import TimeDeltaSensor, TimeDeltaSensorAsync, WaitSensor
from airflow.sensors.weekday import DayOfWeekSensor
from airflow.triggers.external_task import DagStateTrigger, WorkflowTrigger
from airflow.triggers.file import FileTrigger
from airflow.triggers.temporal import DateTimeTrigger, TimeDeltaTrigger
```
## Test Plan
<!-- How was it tested? -->
The test fixture has been updated acccordingly
---------
Co-authored-by: Brent Westbrook <36778786+ntBre@users.noreply.github.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?
-->
Closes#17084
## Summary
This PR adds a new rule (RUF102) to detect and fix invalid rule codes in
`noqa` comments.
Invalid rule codes in `noqa` directives serve no purpose and may
indicate outdated code suppressions.
This extends the previous behaviour originating from
`crates/ruff_linter/src/noqa.rs` which would only emit a warnigs.
With this rule a `--fix` is available.
The rule:
1. Analyzes all `noqa` directives to identify invalid rule codes
2. Provides autofix functionality to:
- Remove the entire comment if all codes are invalid
- Remove only the invalid codes when mixed with valid codes
3. Preserves original comment formatting and whitespace where possible
Example cases:
- `# noqa: XYZ111` → Remove entire comment (keep empty line)
- `# noqa: XYZ222, XYZ333` → Remove entire comment (keep empty line)
- `# noqa: F401, INVALID123` → Keep only valid codes (`# noqa: F401`)
## Test Plan
- Added tests in
`crates/ruff_linter/resources/test/fixtures/ruff/RUF102.py` covering
different example cases.
<!-- How was it tested? -->
## Notes
- This does not handle cases where parsing fails. E.g. `# noqa:
NON_EXISTENT, ANOTHER_INVALID` causes a `LexicalError` and the
diagnostic is not propagated and we cannot handle the diagnostic. I am
also unsure what proper `fix` handling would be and making the user
aware we don't understand the codes is probably the best bet.
- The rule is added to the Preview rule group as it's a new addition
## Questions
- Should we remove the warnings, now that we have a rule?
- Is the current fix behavior appropriate for all cases, particularly
the handling of whitespace and line deletions?
- I'm new to the codebase; let me know if there are rule utilities which
could have used but didn't.
---------
Co-authored-by: Micha Reiser <micha@reiser.io>
## Summary
Following up the discussion in
https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/issues/14626#issuecomment-2766548545,
we're to reorganize airflow rules. Before this discussion happens, we
combine required changes and suggested changes in to one single error
code.
This PR first rename the original error code to the new error code as we
discussed. We will gradually extract suggested changes out of AIR301 and
AIR302 to AIR311 and AIR312 in the following PRs
## Test Plan
Except for file, error code rename, the test case should work as it used
to be.
## Summary
Unlike other AIR3XX rules, this best practice can be applied to Airflow
1 and Airflow 2 as well. Thus, we think it might make sense for use to
move it to AIR002 so that the first number of the error align to Airflow
version as possible to reduce confusion
## Test Plan
the test fixture has been updated
## Summary
Deprecate `S320` because defusedxml has deprecated there `lxml` module
and `lxml` has been hardened since.
flake8-bandit has removed their implementation as well
(https://github.com/PyCQA/bandit/pull/1212).
Addresses https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/issues/13707
## Test Plan
I verified that selecting `S320` prints a warning and fails if the
preview mode is enabled.
## Summary
This PR deprecates UP038. Using PEP 604 syntax in `isinstance` and
`issubclass` calls isn't a recommended pattern (or community agreed best
practice)
and it negatively impacts performance.
Resolves https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/issues/7871
## Test Plan
I tested that selecting `UP038` results in a warning in no-preview mode
and an error in preview mode
Summary
--
Stabilizes TC006. The test was already in the right place.
Test Plan
--
No open issues or PRs. The last related [issue] was closed on
2025-02-09.
[issue]: https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/issues/16037
Summary
--
Stabilizes S704, which is also being recoded from RUF035 in 0.10.
Test Plan
--
Existing tests with `PreviewMode` removed from the settings.
There was one issue closed on 2024-12-20 calling the rule noisy and
asking for a config option, but the option was added and then there were
no more issues or PRs.
Summary
--
Stabilizes DTZ901, renames the rule function to match the rule name,
removes the `preview_rules` test, and handles some nits in the docs
(mention `min` first to match the rule name too).
Test Plan
--
1 closed issue on 2024-11-12, 4 days after the rule was added. No issues
since
Summary
--
Stabilizes RUF041. The tests are already in the right place, and the
docs look good.
Test Plan
--
0 issues, 1 [PR] fixing nested literals and unions the day after the
rule was added. No changes since then
I wonder if the fix in that PR could be relevant for
https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/pull/16639, where I noticed a
potential issue with `Union`. It could be unrelated, though.
[PR]: https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/pull/14641
Summary
--
Stabilizes PTH210. Tests and docs looked good.
Test Plan
--
Mentioned in 1 open issue around Python 3.14 support (`"."` becomes a
valid suffix in 3.14). Otherwise no issues or PRs since 2024-12-12, 6
days after the rule was added.
