## Summary
At present, when we store a binding, we include a `TextRange` alongside
it. The `TextRange` _sometimes_ matches the exact range of the
identifier to which the `Binding` is linked, but... not always.
For example, given:
```python
x = 1
```
The binding we create _will_ use the range of `x`, because the left-hand
side is an `Expr::Name`, which has a valid range on it.
However, given:
```python
try:
pass
except ValueError as e:
pass
```
When we create a binding for `e`, we don't have a `TextRange`... The AST
doesn't give us one. So we end up extracting it via lexing.
This PR extends that pattern to the rest of the binding kinds, to ensure
that whenever we create a binding, we always use the range of the bound
name. This leads to better diagnostics in cases like pattern matching,
whereby the diagnostic for "unused variable `x`" here used to include
`*x`, instead of just `x`:
```python
def f(provided: int) -> int:
match provided:
case [_, *x]:
pass
```
This is _also_ required for symbol renames, since we track writes as
bindings -- so we need to know the ranges of the bound symbols.
By storing these bindings precisely, we can also remove the
`binding.trimmed_range` abstraction -- since bindings already use the
"trimmed range".
To implement this behavior, I took some of our existing utilities (like
the code we had for `except ValueError as e` above), migrated them from
a full lexer to a zero-allocation lexer that _only_ identifies
"identifiers", and moved the behavior into a trait, so we can now do
`stmt.identifier(locator)` to get the range for the identifier.
Honestly, we might end up discarding much of this if we decide to put
ranges on all identifiers
(https://github.com/astral-sh/RustPython-Parser/pull/8). But even if we
do, this will _still_ be a good change, because the lexer introduced
here is useful beyond names (e.g., we use it find the `except` keyword
in an exception handler, to find the `else` after a `for` loop, and so
on). So, I'm fine committing this even if we end up changing our minds
about the right approach.
Closes#5090.
## Benchmarks
No significant change, with one statistically significant improvement
(-2.1654% on `linter/all-rules/large/dataset.py`):
```
linter/default-rules/numpy/globals.py
time: [73.922 µs 73.955 µs 73.986 µs]
thrpt: [39.882 MiB/s 39.898 MiB/s 39.916 MiB/s]
change:
time: [-0.5579% -0.4732% -0.3980%] (p = 0.00 < 0.05)
thrpt: [+0.3996% +0.4755% +0.5611%]
Change within noise threshold.
Found 6 outliers among 100 measurements (6.00%)
4 (4.00%) low severe
1 (1.00%) low mild
1 (1.00%) high mild
linter/default-rules/pydantic/types.py
time: [1.4909 ms 1.4917 ms 1.4926 ms]
thrpt: [17.087 MiB/s 17.096 MiB/s 17.106 MiB/s]
change:
time: [+0.2140% +0.2741% +0.3392%] (p = 0.00 < 0.05)
thrpt: [-0.3380% -0.2734% -0.2136%]
Change within noise threshold.
Found 4 outliers among 100 measurements (4.00%)
3 (3.00%) high mild
1 (1.00%) high severe
linter/default-rules/numpy/ctypeslib.py
time: [688.97 µs 691.34 µs 694.15 µs]
thrpt: [23.988 MiB/s 24.085 MiB/s 24.168 MiB/s]
change:
time: [-1.3282% -0.7298% -0.1466%] (p = 0.02 < 0.05)
thrpt: [+0.1468% +0.7351% +1.3461%]
Change within noise threshold.
Found 15 outliers among 100 measurements (15.00%)
1 (1.00%) low mild
2 (2.00%) high mild
12 (12.00%) high severe
linter/default-rules/large/dataset.py
time: [3.3872 ms 3.4032 ms 3.4191 ms]
thrpt: [11.899 MiB/s 11.954 MiB/s 12.011 MiB/s]
change:
time: [-0.6427% -0.2635% +0.0906%] (p = 0.17 > 0.05)
thrpt: [-0.0905% +0.2642% +0.6469%]
No change in performance detected.
Found 20 outliers among 100 measurements (20.00%)
1 (1.00%) low severe
2 (2.00%) low mild
4 (4.00%) high mild
13 (13.00%) high severe
linter/all-rules/numpy/globals.py
time: [148.99 µs 149.21 µs 149.42 µs]
thrpt: [19.748 MiB/s 19.776 MiB/s 19.805 MiB/s]
change:
time: [-0.7340% -0.5068% -0.2778%] (p = 0.00 < 0.05)
thrpt: [+0.2785% +0.5094% +0.7395%]
Change within noise threshold.
Found 2 outliers among 100 measurements (2.00%)
1 (1.00%) low mild
1 (1.00%) high severe
linter/all-rules/pydantic/types.py
time: [3.0362 ms 3.0396 ms 3.0441 ms]
thrpt: [8.3779 MiB/s 8.3903 MiB/s 8.3997 MiB/s]
change:
time: [-0.0957% +0.0618% +0.2125%] (p = 0.45 > 0.05)
thrpt: [-0.2121% -0.0618% +0.0958%]
No change in performance detected.
Found 11 outliers among 100 measurements (11.00%)
1 (1.00%) low severe
3 (3.00%) low mild
5 (5.00%) high mild
2 (2.00%) high severe
linter/all-rules/numpy/ctypeslib.py
time: [1.6879 ms 1.6894 ms 1.6909 ms]
thrpt: [9.8478 MiB/s 9.8562 MiB/s 9.8652 MiB/s]
change:
time: [-0.2279% -0.0888% +0.0436%] (p = 0.18 > 0.05)
thrpt: [-0.0435% +0.0889% +0.2284%]
No change in performance detected.
Found 5 outliers among 100 measurements (5.00%)
4 (4.00%) low mild
1 (1.00%) high severe
linter/all-rules/large/dataset.py
time: [7.1520 ms 7.1586 ms 7.1654 ms]
thrpt: [5.6777 MiB/s 5.6831 MiB/s 5.6883 MiB/s]
change:
time: [-2.5626% -2.1654% -1.7780%] (p = 0.00 < 0.05)
thrpt: [+1.8102% +2.2133% +2.6300%]
Performance has improved.
Found 2 outliers among 100 measurements (2.00%)
1 (1.00%) low mild
1 (1.00%) high mild
```
## Summary
`ruff_newlines` becomes `ruff_python_whitespace`, and includes the
existing "universal newline" handlers alongside the Python
whitespace-specific utilities.
# Summary
We need to support CR line endings (as opposed to LF and CRLF line endings, which are already supported). They're rare, but they do appear in Python code, and we tend to panic on any file that uses them.
Our `Locator` abstraction now supports CR line endings. However, Rust's `str#lines` implementation does _not_.
This PR adds a `UniversalNewlineIterator` implementation that respects all of CR, LF, and CRLF line endings, and plugs it into most of the `.lines()` call sites.
As an alternative design, it could be nice if we could leverage `Locator` for this. We've already computed all of the line endings, so we could probably iterate much more efficiently?
# Test Plan
Largely relying on automated testing, however, also ran over some known failure cases, like #3404.
This PR productionizes @MichaReiser's suggestion in https://github.com/charliermarsh/ruff/issues/1820#issuecomment-1440204423, by creating a separate crate for the `ast` module (`rust_python_ast`). This will enable us to further split up the `ruff` crate, as we'll be able to create (e.g.) separate sub-linter crates that have access to these common AST utilities.
This was mostly a straightforward copy (with adjustments to module imports), as the few dependencies that _did_ require modifications were handled in #3366, #3367, and #3368.
2023-03-07 15:18:40 +00:00
Renamed from crates/ruff/src/ast/mod.rs (Browse further)
