(This is not possible to actually use until
https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/pull/8854 is merged.)
This commit slots in support for formatting Markdown fenced code
blocks[1]. With the refactoring done for reStructuredText previously,
this ended up being pretty easy to add. Markdown code blocks are also
quite a bit easier to parse and recognize correctly.
One point of contention in #8860 is whether to assume that unlabeled
Markdown code fences are Python or not by default. In this PR, we make
such an assumption. This follows what `rustdoc` does. The mitigation
here is that if an unlabeled code block isn't Python, then it probably
won't parse as Python. And we'll end up skipping it. So in the vast
majority of cases, the worst thing that can happen is a little bit of
wasted work.
Closes#8860
[1]: https://spec.commonmark.org/0.30/#fenced-code-blocks
Rebase of #6365 authored by @davidszotten.
## Summary
This PR updates the AST structure for an f-string elements.
The main **motivation** behind this change is to have a dedicated node
for the string part of an f-string. Previously, the existing
`ExprStringLiteral` node was used for this purpose which isn't exactly
correct. The `ExprStringLiteral` node should include the quotes as well
in the range but the f-string literal element doesn't include the quote
as it's a specific part within an f-string. For example,
```python
f"foo {x}"
# ^^^^
# This is the literal part of an f-string
```
The introduction of `FStringElement` enum is helpful which represent
either the literal part or the expression part of an f-string.
### Rule Updates
This means that there'll be two nodes representing a string depending on
the context. One for a normal string literal while the other is a string
literal within an f-string. The AST checker is updated to accommodate
this change. The rules which work on string literal are updated to check
on the literal part of f-string as well.
#### Notes
1. The `Expr::is_literal_expr` method would check for
`ExprStringLiteral` and return true if so. But now that we don't
represent the literal part of an f-string using that node, this improves
the method's behavior and confines to the actual expression. We do have
the `FStringElement::is_literal` method.
2. We avoid checking if we're in a f-string context before adding to
`string_type_definitions` because the f-string literal is now a
dedicated node and not part of `Expr`.
3. Annotations cannot use f-string so we avoid changing any rules which
work on annotation and checks for `ExprStringLiteral`.
## Test Plan
- All references of `Expr::StringLiteral` were checked to see if any of
the rules require updating to account for the f-string literal element
node.
- New test cases are added for rules which check against the literal
part of an f-string.
- Check the ecosystem results and ensure it remains unchanged.
## Performance
There's a performance penalty in the parser. The reason for this remains
unknown as it seems that the generated assembly code is now different
for the `__reduce154` function. The reduce function body is just popping
the `ParenthesizedExpr` on top of the stack and pushing it with the new
location.
- The size of `FStringElement` enum is the same as `Expr` which is what
it replaces in `FString::format_spec`
- The size of `FStringExpressionElement` is the same as
`ExprFormattedValue` which is what it replaces
I tried reducing the `Expr` enum from 80 bytes to 72 bytes but it hardly
resulted in any performance gain. The difference can be seen here:
- Original profile: https://share.firefox.dev/3Taa7ES
- Profile after boxing some node fields:
https://share.firefox.dev/3GsNXpD
### Backtracking
I tried backtracking the changes to see if any of the isolated change
produced this regression. The problem here is that the overall change is
so small that there's only a single checkpoint where I can backtrack and
that checkpoint results in the same regression. This checkpoint is to
revert using `Expr` to the `FString::format_spec` field. After this
point, the change would revert back to the original implementation.
## Review process
The review process is similar to #7927. The first set of commits update
the node structure, parser, and related AST files. Then, further commits
update the linter and formatter part to account for the AST change.
---------
Co-authored-by: David Szotten <davidszotten@gmail.com>
(This is not possible to actually use until
https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/pull/8854 is merged.)
ruff_python_formatter: add reStructuredText docstring formatting support
This commit makes use of the refactoring done in prior commits to slot
in reStructuredText support. Essentially, we add a new type of code
example and look for *both* literal blocks and code block directives.
Literal blocks are treated as Python by default because it seems to be a
[common
practice](https://github.com/adamchainz/blacken-docs/issues/195).
That is, literal blocks like this:
```
def example():
"""
Here's an example::
foo( 1 )
All done.
"""
pass
```
Will get reformatted. And code blocks (via reStructuredText directives)
will also get reformatted:
```
def example():
"""
Here's an example:
.. code-block:: python
foo( 1 )
All done.
"""
pass
```
When looking for a code block, it is possible for it to become invalid.
In which case, we back out of looking for a code example and print the
lines out as they are. As with doctest formatting, if reformatting the
code would result in invalid Python or if the code collected from the
block is invalid, then formatting is also skipped.
A number of tests have been added to check both the formatting and
resetting behavior. Mixed indentation is also tested a fair bit, since
one of my initial attempts at dealing with mixed indentation ended up
not working.
I recommend working through this PR commit-by-commit. There is in
particular a somewhat gnarly refactoring before reST support is added.
Closes#8859
In the source of working on #8859, I made a number of smallish refactors
to how code snippet formatting works. Most or all of these were
motivated by writing in support for reStructuredText blocks. They have
some fundamentally different requirements than doctests, and there are a
lot more ways for reStructuredText blocks to become invalid.
(Commit-by-commit review is recommended as the commit messages provide
further context on each change. I split this off from ongoing work to
make review more manageable.)
This PR removes several uses of `unsafe`. I generally limited myself to
low hanging fruit that I could see. There are still a few remaining uses
of `unsafe` that looked a bit more difficult to remove (if possible at
all). But this gets rid of a good chunk of them.
I put each `unsafe` removal into its own commit with a justification for
why I did it. So I would encourage reviewing this PR commit-by-commit.
That way, we can legislate them independently. It's no problem to drop a
commit if we feel the `unsafe` should stay in that case.
This turns `string` into a parent module with a `docstring` sub-module.
I arranged things this way because there are parts of the `string`
module that the `docstring` module wants to know about (such as a
`NormalizedString`). The alternative I think would be to make
`docstring` a sibling module and expose more of `string`'s internals.
I think I overall like this change because it gives docstring handling a
bit more room to breath. It has grown quite a bit with the addition of
code snippet formatting.
[This was suggested by
@charliermarsh.](https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/pull/8811#discussion_r1401169531)
## Summary
This PR adds opt-in support for formatting doctests in docstrings. This
reflects initial support and it is intended to add support for Markdown
and reStructuredText Python code blocks in the future. But I believe
this PR lays the groundwork, and future additions for Markdown and reST
should be less costly to add.
It's strongly recommended to review this PR commit-by-commit. The last
few commits in particular implement the bulk of the work here and
represent the denser portions.
Some things worth mentioning:
* The formatter is itself not perfect, and it is possible for it to
produce invalid Python code. Because of this, reformatted code snippets
are checked for Python validity. If they aren't valid, then we
(unfortunately silently) bail on formatting that code snippet.
* There are a couple places where it would be nice to at least warn the
user that doctest formatting failed, but it wasn't clear to me what the
best way to do that is.
* I haven't yet run this in anger on a real world code base. I think
that should happen before merging.
Closes#7146
## Test Plan
* [x] Pass the local test suite.
* [x] Scrutinize ecosystem changes.
* [x] Run this formatter on extant code and scrutinize the results.
(e.g., CPython, numpy.)
## Summary
This PR updates the string nodes (`ExprStringLiteral`,
`ExprBytesLiteral`, and `ExprFString`) to account for implicit string
concatenation.
### Motivation
In Python, implicit string concatenation are joined while parsing
because the interpreter doesn't require the information for each part.
While that's feasible for an interpreter, it falls short for a static
analysis tool where having such information is more useful. Currently,
various parts of the code uses the lexer to get the individual string
parts.
One of the main challenge this solves is that of string formatting.
Currently, the formatter relies on the lexer to get the individual
string parts, and formats them including the comments accordingly. But,
with PEP 701, f-string can also contain comments. Without this change,
it becomes very difficult to add support for f-string formatting.
### Implementation
The initial proposal was made in this discussion:
https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/discussions/6183#discussioncomment-6591993.
There were various AST designs which were explored for this task which
are available in the linked internal document[^1].
The selected variant was the one where the nodes were kept as it is
except that the `implicit_concatenated` field was removed and instead a
new struct was added to the `Expr*` struct. This would be a private
struct would contain the actual implementation of how the AST is
designed for both single and implicitly concatenated strings.
This implementation is achieved through an enum with two variants:
`Single` and `Concatenated` to avoid allocating a vector even for single
strings. There are various public methods available on the value struct
to query certain information regarding the node.
The nodes are structured in the following way:
```
ExprStringLiteral - "foo" "bar"
|- StringLiteral - "foo"
|- StringLiteral - "bar"
ExprBytesLiteral - b"foo" b"bar"
|- BytesLiteral - b"foo"
|- BytesLiteral - b"bar"
ExprFString - "foo" f"bar {x}"
|- FStringPart::Literal - "foo"
|- FStringPart::FString - f"bar {x}"
|- StringLiteral - "bar "
|- FormattedValue - "x"
```
[^1]: Internal document:
https://www.notion.so/astral-sh/Implicit-String-Concatenation-e036345dc48943f89e416c087bf6f6d9?pvs=4
#### Visitor
The way the nodes are structured is that the entire string, including
all the parts that are implicitly concatenation, is a single node
containing individual nodes for the parts. The previous section has a
representation of that tree for all the string nodes. This means that
new visitor methods are added to visit the individual parts of string,
bytes, and f-strings for `Visitor`, `PreorderVisitor`, and
`Transformer`.
## Test Plan
- `cargo insta test --workspace --all-features --unreferenced reject`
- Verify that the ecosystem results are unchanged
Fix an instability where await was followed by a breaking fluent style
expression:
```python
test_data = await (
Stream.from_async(async_data)
.flat_map_async()
.map()
.filter_async(is_valid_data)
.to_list()
)
```
Note that this technically a minor style change (see ecosystem check)
Update to [Rust
1.74](https://blog.rust-lang.org/2023/11/16/Rust-1.74.0.html) and use
the new clippy lints table.
The update itself introduced a new clippy lint about superfluous hashes
in raw strings, which got removed.
I moved our lint config from `rustflags` to the newly stabilized
[workspace.lints](https://doc.rust-lang.org/stable/cargo/reference/workspaces.html#the-lints-table).
One consequence is that we have to `unsafe_code = "warn"` instead of
"forbid" because the latter now actually bans unsafe code:
```
error[E0453]: allow(unsafe_code) incompatible with previous forbid
--> crates/ruff_source_file/src/newlines.rs:62:17
|
62 | #[allow(unsafe_code)]
| ^^^^^^^^^^^ overruled by previous forbid
|
= note: `forbid` lint level was set on command line
```
---------
Co-authored-by: Charlie Marsh <charlie.r.marsh@gmail.com>
## Summary
This PR updates the formatter to preserve trailing semicolon for Jupyter
Notebooks.
The motivation behind the change is that semicolons in notebooks are
typically used to hide the output, for example when plotting. This is
highlighted in the linked issue.
The conditions required as to when the trailing semicolon should be
preserved are:
1. It should be a top-level statement which is last in the module.
2. For statement, it can be either assignment, annotated assignment, or
augmented assignment. Here, the target should only be a single
identifier i.e., multiple assignments or tuple unpacking isn't
considered.
3. For expression, it can be any.
## Test Plan
Add a new integration test in `ruff_cli`. The test notebook basically
acts as a document as to which trailing semicolons are to be preserved.
fixes: #8254
## Summary
This PR inlines the formatting logic for `ExprNumberLiteral` and removes
the need of having dedicated `Format*` struct for each number type.
## Test Plan
`cargo test`
## Summary
This PR splits the `Constant` enum as individual literal nodes. It
introduces the following new nodes for each variant:
* `ExprStringLiteral`
* `ExprBytesLiteral`
* `ExprNumberLiteral`
* `ExprBooleanLiteral`
* `ExprNoneLiteral`
* `ExprEllipsisLiteral`
The main motivation behind this refactor is to introduce the new AST
node for implicit string concatenation in the coming PR. The elements of
that node will be either a string literal, bytes literal or a f-string
which can be implemented using an enum. This means that a string or
bytes literal cannot be represented by `Constant::Str` /
`Constant::Bytes` which creates an inconsistency.
This PR avoids that inconsistency by splitting the constant nodes into
it's own literal nodes, literal being the more appropriate naming
convention from a static analysis tool perspective.
This also makes working with literals in the linter and formatter much
more ergonomic like, for example, if one would want to check if this is
a string literal, it can be done easily using
`Expr::is_string_literal_expr` or matching against `Expr::StringLiteral`
as oppose to matching against the `ExprConstant` and enum `Constant`. A
few AST helper methods can be simplified as well which will be done in a
follow-up PR.
This introduces a new `Expr::is_literal_expr` method which is the same
as `Expr::is_constant_expr`. There are also intermediary changes related
to implicit string concatenation which are quiet less. This is done so
as to avoid having a huge PR which this already is.
## Test Plan
1. Verify and update all of the existing snapshots (parser, visitor)
2. Verify that the ecosystem check output remains **unchanged** for both
the linter and formatter
### Formatter ecosystem check
#### `main`
| project | similarity index | total files | changed files |
|----------------|------------------:|------------------:|------------------:|
| cpython | 0.75803 | 1799 | 1647 |
| django | 0.99983 | 2772 | 34 |
| home-assistant | 0.99953 | 10596 | 186 |
| poetry | 0.99891 | 317 | 17 |
| transformers | 0.99966 | 2657 | 330 |
| twine | 1.00000 | 33 | 0 |
| typeshed | 0.99978 | 3669 | 20 |
| warehouse | 0.99977 | 654 | 13 |
| zulip | 0.99970 | 1459 | 22 |
#### `dhruv/constant-to-literal`
| project | similarity index | total files | changed files |
|----------------|------------------:|------------------:|------------------:|
| cpython | 0.75803 | 1799 | 1647 |
| django | 0.99983 | 2772 | 34 |
| home-assistant | 0.99953 | 10596 | 186 |
| poetry | 0.99891 | 317 | 17 |
| transformers | 0.99966 | 2657 | 330 |
| twine | 1.00000 | 33 | 0 |
| typeshed | 0.99978 | 3669 | 20 |
| warehouse | 0.99977 | 654 | 13 |
| zulip | 0.99970 | 1459 | 22 |
## Summary
This PR removes the `todo!()` around `IpyEscapeCommand` in the
formatter.
The `NeedsParentheses` trait needs to be implemented which always return
`Never`. The reason being that if an escape command is parenthesized,
then that's not parsed as an escape command. IOW, the parentheses
shouldn't be present around an escape command.
In the similar way, the `CanSkipOptionalParenthesesVisitor` will skip
this node.
## Test Plan
Updated the `unformatted.ipynb` fixture with new cells containing
IPython escape commands and the corresponding snapshot was verified.
Also, tested it out in a few open source repositories containing
notebooks (`openai/openai-cookbook`, `huggingface/notebooks`).
#### New cells in `unformatted.ipynb`
**Cell 2**
```markdown
A markdown cell
```
**Cell 3**
```python
def some_function(foo, bar):
pass
%matplotlib inline
```
**Cell 4**
```python
foo = %pwd
def some_function(foo,bar,):
foo = %pwd
print(foo
)
```
fixes: #8204
<!--
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 https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/issues/7448
Fixes https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/issues/7892
I've removed automatic dangling comment formatting, we're doing manual
dangling comment formatting everywhere anyway (the
assert-all-comments-formatted ensures this) and dangling comments would
break the formatting there.
## Test Plan
New test file.
---------
Co-authored-by: Micha Reiser <micha@reiser.io>
**Summary** Quoting of f-strings can change if they are triple quoted
and only contain single quotes inside.
Fixes#6841
**Test Plan** New fixtures
---------
Co-authored-by: Dhruv Manilawala <dhruvmanila@gmail.com>
## Summary
At present, `quote-style` is used universally. However, [PEP
8](https://peps.python.org/pep-0008/) and [PEP
257](https://peps.python.org/pep-0257/) suggest that while either single
or double quotes are acceptable in general (as long as they're
consistent), docstrings and triple-quoted strings should always use
double quotes. In our research, the vast majority of Ruff users that
enable the `flake8-quotes` rules only enable them for inline strings
(i.e., non-triple-quoted strings).
Additionally, many Black forks (like Blue and Pyink) use double quotes
for docstrings and triple-quoted strings.
Our decision for now is to always prefer double quotes for triple-quoted
strings (which should include docstrings). Based on feedback, we may
consider adding additional options (e.g., a `"preserve"` mode, to avoid
changing quotes; or a `"multiline-quote-style"` to override this).
Closes https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/issues/7615.
## Test Plan
`cargo test`
## Summary
No-op refactor, but we can evaluate early if the first part of
`preserve_parentheses || has_comments` is `true`, and thus avoid looking
up the node comments.
## Test Plan
`cargo test`
Similar to tuples, a generator _can_ be parenthesized or
unparenthesized. Only search for bracketed comments if it contains its
own parentheses.
Closes https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/issues/7623.
