## Summary
Adds a markdown-based test framework for writing tests of type inference
and type checking. Fixes#11664.
Implements the basic required features. A markdown test file is a suite
of tests, each test can contain one or more Python files, with
optionally specified path/name. The test writes all files to an
in-memory file system, runs red-knot, and matches the resulting
diagnostics against `Type: ` and `Error: ` assertions embedded in the
Python source as comments.
We will want to add features like incremental tests, setting custom
configuration for tests, writing non-Python files, testing syntax
errors, capturing full diagnostic output, etc. There's also plenty of
room for improved UX (colored output?).
## Test Plan
Lots of tests!
Sample of the current output when a test fails:
```
Running tests/inference.rs (target/debug/deps/inference-7c96590aa84de2a4)
running 1 test
test inference::path_1_resources_inference_numbers_md ... FAILED
failures:
---- inference::path_1_resources_inference_numbers_md stdout ----
inference/numbers.md - Numbers - Floats
/src/test.py
line 2: unexpected error: [invalid-assignment] "Object of type `Literal["str"]` is not assignable to `int`"
thread 'inference::path_1_resources_inference_numbers_md' panicked at crates/red_knot_test/src/lib.rs:60:5:
Some tests failed.
note: run with `RUST_BACKTRACE=1` environment variable to display a backtrace
failures:
inference::path_1_resources_inference_numbers_md
test result: FAILED. 0 passed; 1 failed; 0 ignored; 0 measured; 0 filtered out; finished in 0.19s
error: test failed, to rerun pass `-p red_knot_test --test inference`
```
---------
Co-authored-by: Micha Reiser <micha@reiser.io>
Co-authored-by: Alex Waygood <Alex.Waygood@Gmail.com>
Fixed a TODO by adding another TODO. It's the red-knot way!
## Summary
`builtins.type` can be subscripted at runtime on Python 3.9+, even
though it has no `__class_getitem__` method and its metaclass (which
is... itself) has no `__getitem__` method. The special case is
[hardcoded directly into `PyObject_GetItem` in
CPython](744caa8ef4/Objects/abstract.c (L181-L184)).
We just have to replicate the special case in our semantic model.
This will fail at runtime on Python <3.9. However, there's a bunch of
outstanding questions (detailed in the TODO comment I added) regarding
how we deal with subscriptions of other generic types on lower Python
versions. Since we want to avoid too many false positives for now, I
haven't tried to address this; I've just made `type` subscriptable on
all Python versions.
## Test Plan
`cargo test -p red_knot_python_semantic --lib`
<!--
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
Treat async generators as "await" in ASYNC100.
Fixes#13637
## Test Plan
Updated snapshot
## Summary
Implements string literal comparisons and fallbacks to `str` instance
for `LiteralString`.
Completes an item in #13618
## Test Plan
- Adds a dedicated test with non exhaustive cases
---------
Co-authored-by: Alex Waygood <Alex.Waygood@Gmail.com>
## Summary
Implements the comparison operator for `[Type::IntLiteral]` and
`[Type::BooleanLiteral]` (as an artifact of special handling of `True` and
`False` in python).
Sets the framework to implement more comparison for types known at
static time (e.g. `BooleanLiteral`, `StringLiteral`), allowing us to only
implement cases of the triplet `<left> Type`, `<right> Type`, `CmpOp`.
Contributes to #12701 (without checking off an item yet).
## Test Plan
- Added a test for the comparison of literals that should include most
cases of note.
- Added a test for the comparison of int instances
Please note that the cases do not cover 100% of the branches as there
are many and the current testing strategy with variables make this
fairly confusing once we have too many in one test.
---------
Co-authored-by: Carl Meyer <carl@astral.sh>
Co-authored-by: Alex Waygood <Alex.Waygood@Gmail.com>
## Summary
Resolves https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/issues/9962 by allowing a
configuration setting `allowed-unused-imports`
TODO:
- [x] Figure out the correct name and place for the setting; currently,
I have added it top level.
- [x] The comparison is pretty naive. I tried using `glob::Pattern` but
couldn't get it to work in the configuration.
- [x] Add tests
- [x] Update documentations
## Test Plan
`cargo test`
Closes https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/issues/13545
As described in the issue, we move comments before the inner `if`
statement to before the newly constructed `elif` statement (previously
`else`).
## Summary
fix#13602
Currently, `UP043` only applies to typing.Generator, but it should also
support collections.abc.Generator.
This update ensures `UP043` correctly handles both
`collections.abc.Generator` and `collections.abc.AsyncGenerator`
### UP043
> `UP043`
> Python 3.13 introduced the ability for type parameters to specify
default values. As such, the default type arguments for some types in
the standard library (e.g., Generator, AsyncGenerator) are now optional.
> Omitting type parameters that match the default values can make the
code more concise and easier to read.
```py
Generator[int, None, None] -> Generator[int]
```
## Summary
...and remove periods from messages that don't span more than a single
sentence.
This is more consistent with how we present user-facing messages in uv
(which has a defined style guide).
## Summary
You can now call `return_ty_result` to operate on a `Result` directly
thereby using your own diagnostics, as in:
```rust
return dunder_getitem_method
.call(self.db, &[slice_ty])
.return_ty_result(self.db, value.as_ref().into(), self)
.unwrap_or_else(|err| {
self.add_diagnostic(
(&**value).into(),
"call-non-callable",
format_args!(
"Method `__getitem__` is not callable on object of type '{}'.",
value_ty.display(self.db),
),
);
err.return_ty()
});
```
While looking into https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/issues/13545 I
noticed that we return `None` here if you pass a block of comments. This
is annoying because it causes `adjust_indentation` to fall back to
LibCST which panics when it cannot find a statement.
Adds a diagnostic for division by the integer zero in `//`, `/`, and
`%`.
Doesn't handle `<int> / 0.0` because we don't track the values of float
literals.
This variant shows inference that is not yet implemented..
## Summary
PR #13500 reopened the idea of adding a new type variant to keep track
of not-implemented features in Red Knot.
It was based off of #12986 with a more generic approach of keeping track
of different kind of unknowns. Discussion in #13500 agreed that keeping
track of different `Unknown` is complicated for now, and this feature is
better achieved through a new variant of `Type`.
### Requirements
Requirements for this implementation can be summed up with some extracts
of comment from @carljm on the previous PR
> So at the moment we are leaning towards simplifying this PR to just
use a new top-level variant, which behaves like Any and Unknown but
represents inference that is not yet implemented in red-knot.
> I think the general rule should be that Todo should propagate only
when the presence of the input Todo caused the output to be unknown.
>
> To take a specific example, the inferred result of addition must be
Unknown if either operand is Unknown. That is, Unknown + X will always
be Unknown regardless of what X is. (Same for X + Unknown.) In this
case, I believe that Unknown + Todo (or Todo + Unknown) should result in
Unknown, not result in Todo. If we fix the upstream source of the Todo,
the result would still be Unknown, so it's not useful to propagate the
Todo in this case: it wrongly suggests that the output is unknown
because of a todo item.
## Test Plan
This PR does not introduce new tests, but it did required to edit some
tests with the display of `[Type::Todo]` (currently `@Todo`), which
suggests that those test are placeholders requirements for features we
don't support yet.
While working on https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/pull/13576 I noticed
that it was really hard to tell which assertion failed in some of these
test cases. This could be expanded to elsewhere, but I've heard this
test suite format won't be around for long?
