Commit graph

25 commits

Author SHA1 Message Date
Micha Reiser
3150812ac4
[red-knot] Add 'Format document' to playground (#17217)
## Summary
This is more "because we can" than something we need. 

But since we're already building an "almost IDE" 

## Test Plan



https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/3a4bdad1-ba32-455a-9909-cfeb8caa1b28
2025-04-07 09:26:03 +02:00
Brent Westbrook
dcf31c9348
[syntax-errors] PEP 701 f-strings before Python 3.12 (#16543)
## Summary

This PR detects the use of PEP 701 f-strings before 3.12. This one
sounded difficult and ended up being pretty easy, so I think there's a
good chance I've over-simplified things. However, from experimenting in
the Python REPL and checking with [pyright], I think this is correct.
pyright actually doesn't even flag the comment case, but Python does.

I also checked pyright's implementation for
[quotes](98dc4469cc/packages/pyright-internal/src/analyzer/checker.ts (L1379-L1398))
and
[escapes](98dc4469cc/packages/pyright-internal/src/analyzer/checker.ts (L1365-L1377))
and think I've approximated how they do it.

Python's error messages also point to the simple approach of these
characters simply not being allowed:

```pycon
Python 3.11.11 (main, Feb 12 2025, 14:51:05) [Clang 19.1.6 ] on linux
Type "help", "copyright", "credits" or "license" for more information.
>>> f'''multiline {
... expression # comment
... }'''
  File "<stdin>", line 3
    }'''
        ^
SyntaxError: f-string expression part cannot include '#'
>>> f'''{not a line \
... continuation}'''
  File "<stdin>", line 2
    continuation}'''
                    ^
SyntaxError: f-string expression part cannot include a backslash
>>> f'hello {'world'}'
  File "<stdin>", line 1
    f'hello {'world'}'
              ^^^^^
SyntaxError: f-string: expecting '}'
```

And since escapes aren't allowed, I don't think there are any tricky
cases where nested quotes or comments can sneak in.

It's also slightly annoying that the error is repeated for every nested
quote character, but that also mirrors pyright, although they highlight
the whole nested string, which is a little nicer. However, their check
is in the analysis phase, so I don't think we have such easy access to
the quoted range, at least without adding another mini visitor.

## Test Plan

New inline tests

[pyright]:
https://pyright-play.net/?pythonVersion=3.11&strict=true&code=EYQw5gBAvBAmCWBjALgCgO4gHaygRgEoAoEaCAIgBpyiiBiCLAUwGdknYIBHAVwHt2LIgDMA5AFlwSCJhwAuCAG8IoMAG1Rs2KIC6EAL6iIxosbPmLlq5foRWiEAAcmERAAsQAJxAomnltY2wuSKogA6WKIAdABWfPBYqCAE%2BuSBVqbpWVm2iHwAtvlMWMgB2ekiolUAgq4FjgA2TAAeEMieSADWCsoV5qoaqrrGDJ5MiDz%2B8ABuLqosAIREhlXlaybrmyYMXsDw7V4AnoysyAmQ5SIhwYo3d9cheADUeKlv5O%2BpQA
2025-03-18 11:12:15 -04:00
Brent Westbrook
75a562d313
[syntax-errors] Parenthesized context managers before Python 3.9 (#16523)
Summary
--

I thought this was very complicated based on the comment here:
https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/pull/16106#issuecomment-2653505671 and
on some of the discussion in the CPython issue here:
https://github.com/python/cpython/issues/56991. However, after a little
bit of experimentation, I think it boils down to this example:

```python
with (x as y): ...
```

The issue is parentheses around a `with` item with an `optional_var`, as
we (and
[Python](https://docs.python.org/3/library/ast.html#ast.withitem)) call
the trailing variable name (`y` in this case). It's not actually about
line breaks after all, except that line breaks are allowed in
parenthesized expressions, which explains the validity of cases like


```pycon
>>> with (
...     x,
...     y
... ) as foo:
...     pass
... 
```

even on Python 3.8.

I followed [pyright]'s example again here on the diagnostic range (just
the opening paren) and the wording of the error.


Test Plan
--
Inline tests

[pyright]:
https://pyright-play.net/?pythonVersion=3.7&strict=true&code=FAdwlgLgFgBAFAewA4FMB2cBEAzBCB0EAHhJgJQwCGAzjLgmQFwz6tA
2025-03-17 08:54:55 -04:00
Alex Waygood
38bfda94ce
[syntax-errors] Improve error message and range for pre-PEP-614 decorator syntax errors (#16581)
## Summary

A small followup to https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/pull/16386. We now
tell the user exactly what it was about their decorator that constituted
invalid syntax on Python <3.9, and the range now highlights the specific
sub-expression that is invalid rather than highlighting the whole
decorator

## Test Plan

Inline snapshots are updated, and new ones are added.
2025-03-17 11:17:27 +00:00
Brent Westbrook
3a32e56445
[syntax-errors] Unparenthesized assignment expressions in sets and indexes (#16404)
## Summary
This PR detects unparenthesized assignment expressions used in set
literals and comprehensions and in sequence indexes. The link to the
release notes in https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/issues/6591 just has
this entry:
> * Assignment expressions can now be used unparenthesized within set
literals and set comprehensions, as well as in sequence indexes (but not
slices).

with no other information, so hopefully the test cases I came up with
cover all of the changes. I also tested these out in the Python REPL and
they actually worked in Python 3.9 too. I'm guessing this may be another
case that was "formally made part of the language spec in Python 3.10,
but usable -- and commonly used -- in Python >=3.9" as @AlexWaygood
added to the body of #6591 for context managers. So we may want to
change the version cutoff, but I've gone along with the release notes
for now.

## Test Plan

New inline parser tests and linter CLI tests.
2025-03-14 15:06:42 -04:00
Brent Westbrook
6311412373
[syntax-errors] Star annotations before Python 3.11 (#16545)
Summary
--

This is closely related to (and stacked on)
https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/pull/16544 and detects star
annotations in function definitions.

I initially called the variant `StarExpressionInAnnotation` to mirror
`StarExpressionInIndex`, but I realized it's not really a "star
expression" in this position and renamed it. `StarAnnotation` seems in
line with the PEP.

Test Plan
--

Two new inline tests. It looked like there was pretty good existing
coverage of this syntax, so I just added simple examples to test the
version cutoff.
2025-03-14 15:20:44 +00:00
Brent Westbrook
4f2851982d
[syntax-errors] Star expression in index before Python 3.11 (#16544)
Summary
--

This PR detects tuple unpacking expressions in index/subscript
expressions before Python 3.11.

Test Plan
--

New inline tests
2025-03-14 14:51:34 +00:00
Brent Westbrook
2382fe1f25
[syntax-errors] Tuple unpacking in for statement iterator clause before Python 3.9 (#16558)
Summary
--

This PR reuses a slightly modified version of the
`check_tuple_unpacking` method added for detecting unpacking in `return`
and `yield` statements to detect the same issue in the iterator clause
of `for` loops.

I ran into the same issue with a bare `for x in *rest: ...` example
(invalid even on Python 3.13) and added it as a comment on
https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/issues/16520.

I considered just making this an additional `StarTupleKind` variant as
well, but this change was in a different version of Python, so I kept it
separate.

Test Plan
--

New inline tests.
2025-03-13 15:55:17 -04:00
Micha Reiser
9cd0cdefd3
Assert that formatted code doesn't introduce any new unsupported syntax errors (#16549)
## Summary

This should give us better coverage for the unsupported syntax error
features and
increases our confidence that the formatter doesn't accidentially
introduce new unsupported
syntax errors. 

A feature like this would have been very useful when working on f-string
formatting
where it took a lot of iteration to find all Python 3.11 or older
incompatibilities.

## Test Plan

I applied my changes on top of
https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/pull/16523 and
removed the target version check in the with-statement formatting code.
As expected,
the integration tests now failed
2025-03-07 09:12:00 +01:00
Brent Westbrook
b3c884f4f3
[syntax-errors] Parenthesized keyword argument names after Python 3.8 (#16482)
Summary
--

Unlike the other syntax errors detected so far, parenthesized keyword
arguments are only allowed *before* 3.8. It sounds like they were only
accidentally allowed before that [^1].

As an aside, you get a pretty confusing error from Python for this, so
it's nice that we can catch it:

```pycon
>>> def f(**kwargs): ...
... f((a)=1)
...
  File "<python-input-0>", line 2
    f((a)=1)
       ^^^
SyntaxError: expression cannot contain assignment, perhaps you meant "=="?
>>>
```
Test Plan
--
Inline tests.

[^1]: https://github.com/python/cpython/issues/78822
2025-03-06 12:18:13 -05:00
Brent Westbrook
6c14225c66
[syntax-errors] Tuple unpacking in return and yield before Python 3.8 (#16485)
Summary
--

Checks for tuple unpacking in `return` and `yield` statements before
Python 3.8, as described [here].

Test Plan
--
Inline tests.

[here]: https://github.com/python/cpython/issues/76298
2025-03-06 11:57:20 -05:00
Brent Westbrook
318f503714
[syntax-errors] Named expressions in decorators before Python 3.9 (#16386)
Summary
--

This PR detects the relaxed grammar for decorators proposed in [PEP
614](https://peps.python.org/pep-0614/) on Python 3.8 and lower.

The 3.8 grammar for decorators is
[here](https://docs.python.org/3.8/reference/compound_stmts.html#grammar-token-decorators):

```
decorators                ::=  decorator+
decorator                 ::=  "@" dotted_name ["(" [argument_list [","]] ")"] NEWLINE
dotted_name               ::=  identifier ("." identifier)*
```

in contrast to the current grammar
[here](https://docs.python.org/3/reference/compound_stmts.html#grammar-token-python-grammar-decorators)

```
decorators                ::= decorator+
decorator                 ::= "@" assignment_expression NEWLINE
assignment_expression ::= [identifier ":="] expression
```

Test Plan
--

New inline parser tests.
2025-03-05 17:08:18 +00:00
Brent Westbrook
d0623888b3
[syntax-errors] Positional-only parameters before Python 3.8 (#16481)
Summary
--

Detect positional-only parameters before Python 3.8, as marked by the
`/` separator in a parameter list.

Test Plan
--
Inline tests.
2025-03-05 13:46:43 +00:00
Brent Westbrook
81bcdcebd3
[syntax-errors] Type parameter lists before Python 3.12 (#16479)
Summary
--

Another simple one, just detect type parameter lists in functions
and classes. Like pyright, we don't emit a second diagnostic for
`type` alias statements, which were also introduced in 3.12.

Test Plan
--
Inline tests.
2025-03-05 13:19:09 +00:00
Brent Westbrook
32c66ec4b7
[syntax-errors] type alias statements before Python 3.12 (#16478)
Summary
--
Another simple one, just detect standalone `type` statements. I limited
the diagnostic to `type` itself like [pyright]. That probably makes the
most sense for more complicated examples.

Test Plan
--
Inline tests.

[pyright]:
https://pyright-play.net/?pythonVersion=3.8&strict=true&code=C4TwDgpgBAHlC8UCWA7YQ
2025-03-04 17:20:10 +00:00
Brent Westbrook
e7b93f93ef
[syntax-errors] Type parameter defaults before Python 3.13 (#16447)
Summary
--

Detects the presence of a [PEP 696] type parameter default before Python
3.13.

Test Plan
--

New inline parser tests for type aliases, generic functions and generic
classes.

[PEP 696]: https://peps.python.org/pep-0696/#grammar-changes
2025-03-04 16:53:38 +00:00
Brent Westbrook
e924ecbdac
[syntax-errors] except* before Python 3.11 (#16446)
Summary
--

One of the simpler ones, just detect the use of `except*` before 3.11.

Test Plan
--

New inline tests.
2025-03-02 18:20:18 +00:00
Brent Westbrook
4431978262
[syntax-errors] Assignment expressions before Python 3.8 (#16383)
## Summary
This PR is the first in a series derived from
https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/pull/16308, each of which add support
for detecting one version-related syntax error from
https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/issues/6591. This one should be
the largest because it also includes the addition of the 
`Parser::add_unsupported_syntax_error` method

Otherwise I think the general structure will be the same for each syntax
error:
* Detecting the error in the parser
* Inline parser tests for the new error
* New ruff CLI tests for the new error

## Test Plan
As noted above, there are new inline parser tests, as well as new ruff
CLI
tests. Once https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/pull/16379 is resolved,
there should also be new mdtests for red-knot,
but this PR does not currently include those.
2025-02-28 17:13:46 -05:00
Brent Westbrook
78806361fd
Start detecting version-related syntax errors in the parser (#16090)
## Summary

This PR builds on the changes in #16220 to pass a target Python version
to the parser. It also adds the `Parser::unsupported_syntax_errors` field, which
collects version-related syntax errors while parsing. These syntax
errors are then turned into `Message`s in ruff (in preview mode).

This PR only detects one syntax error (`match` statement before Python
3.10), but it has been pretty quick to extend to several other simple
errors (see #16308 for example).

## Test Plan

The current tests are CLI tests in the linter crate, but these could be
supplemented with inline parser tests after #16357.

I also tested the display of these syntax errors in VS Code:


![image](https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/062b4441-740e-46c3-887c-a954049ef26e)

![image](https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/101f55b8-146c-4d59-b6b0-922f19bcd0fa)

---------

Co-authored-by: Alex Waygood <alex.waygood@gmail.com>
2025-02-25 23:03:48 -05:00
Dhruv Manilawala
978909fcf4
Raise syntax error for unparenthesized generator expr in multi-argument call (#12445)
## Summary

This PR fixes a bug to raise a syntax error when an unparenthesized
generator expression is used as an argument to a call when there are
more than one argument.

For reference, the grammar is:
```
primary:
    | ...
    | primary genexp 
    | primary '(' [arguments] ')' 
    | ...

genexp:
    | '(' ( assignment_expression | expression !':=') for_if_clauses ')' 
```

The `genexp` requires the parenthesis as mentioned in the grammar. So,
the grammar for a call expression is either a name followed by a
generator expression or a name followed by a list of argument. In the
former case, the parenthesis are excluded because the generator
expression provides them while in the later case, the parenthesis are
explicitly provided for a list of arguments which means that the
generator expression requires it's own parenthesis.

This was discovered in https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/issues/12420.

## Test Plan

Add test cases for valid and invalid syntax.

Make sure that the parser from CPython also raises this at the parsing
step:
```console
$ python3.13 -m ast parser/_.py
  File "parser/_.py", line 1
    total(1, 2, x for x in range(5), 6)
                ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
SyntaxError: Generator expression must be parenthesized

$ python3.13 -m ast parser/_.py
  File "parser/_.py", line 1
    sum(x for x in range(10), 10)
        ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
SyntaxError: Generator expression must be parenthesized
```
2024-07-22 14:44:20 +05:30
Dhruv Manilawala
434ce307a7
Revert "Use correct range to highlight line continuation error" (#12089)
This PR reverts https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/pull/12016 with a
small change where the error location points to the continuation
character only. Earlier, it would also highlight the whitespace that
came before it.

The motivation for this change is to avoid panic in
https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/pull/11950. For example:

```py
\)
```

Playground: https://play.ruff.rs/87711071-1b54-45a3-b45a-81a336a1ea61

The range of `Unknown` token and `Rpar` is the same. Once #11950 is
enabled, the indexer would panic. It won't panic in the stable version
because we stop at the first `Unknown` token.
2024-06-28 18:10:00 +05:30
Dhruv Manilawala
7cb2619ef5
Add syntax error for empty type parameter list (#12030)
## Summary

(I'm pretty sure I added this in the parser re-write but must've got
lost in the rebase?)

This PR raises a syntax error if the type parameter list is empty.

As per the grammar, there should be at least one type parameter:
```
type_params: 
    | invalid_type_params
    | '[' type_param_seq ']' 

type_param_seq: ','.type_param+ [','] 
```

Verified via the builtin `ast` module as well:
```console    
$ python3.13 -m ast parser/_.py
Traceback (most recent call last):
  [..]
  File "parser/_.py", line 1
    def foo[]():
            ^
SyntaxError: Type parameter list cannot be empty
```

## Test Plan

Add inline test cases and update the snapshots.
2024-06-26 08:10:35 +05:30
Dhruv Manilawala
96da136e6a
Move token and error structs into related modules (#11957)
## Summary

This PR does some housekeeping into moving certain structs into related
modules. Specifically,
1. Move `LexicalError` from `lexer.rs` to `error.rs` which also contains
the `ParseError`
2. Move `Token`, `TokenFlags` and `TokenValue` from `lexer.rs` to
`token.rs`
2024-06-21 10:07:19 +00:00
Dhruv Manilawala
bf5b62edac
Maintain synchronicity between the lexer and the parser (#11457)
## Summary

This PR updates the entire parser stack in multiple ways:

### Make the lexer lazy

* https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/pull/11244
* https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/pull/11473

Previously, Ruff's lexer would act as an iterator. The parser would
collect all the tokens in a vector first and then process the tokens to
create the syntax tree.

The first task in this project is to update the entire parsing flow to
make the lexer lazy. This includes the `Lexer`, `TokenSource`, and
`Parser`. For context, the `TokenSource` is a wrapper around the `Lexer`
to filter out the trivia tokens[^1]. Now, the parser will ask the token
source to get the next token and only then the lexer will continue and
emit the token. This means that the lexer needs to be aware of the
"current" token. When the `next_token` is called, the current token will
be updated with the newly lexed token.

The main motivation to make the lexer lazy is to allow re-lexing a token
in a different context. This is going to be really useful to make the
parser error resilience. For example, currently the emitted tokens
remains the same even if the parser can recover from an unclosed
parenthesis. This is important because the lexer emits a
`NonLogicalNewline` in parenthesized context while a normal `Newline` in
non-parenthesized context. This different kinds of newline is also used
to emit the indentation tokens which is important for the parser as it's
used to determine the start and end of a block.

Additionally, this allows us to implement the following functionalities:
1. Checkpoint - rewind infrastructure: The idea here is to create a
checkpoint and continue lexing. At a later point, this checkpoint can be
used to rewind the lexer back to the provided checkpoint.
2. Remove the `SoftKeywordTransformer` and instead use lookahead or
speculative parsing to determine whether a soft keyword is a keyword or
an identifier
3. Remove the `Tok` enum. The `Tok` enum represents the tokens emitted
by the lexer but it contains owned data which makes it expensive to
clone. The new `TokenKind` enum just represents the type of token which
is very cheap.

This brings up a question as to how will the parser get the owned value
which was stored on `Tok`. This will be solved by introducing a new
`TokenValue` enum which only contains a subset of token kinds which has
the owned value. This is stored on the lexer and is requested by the
parser when it wants to process the data. For example:
8196720f80/crates/ruff_python_parser/src/parser/expression.rs (L1260-L1262)

[^1]: Trivia tokens are `NonLogicalNewline` and `Comment`

### Remove `SoftKeywordTransformer`

* https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/pull/11441
* https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/pull/11459
* https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/pull/11442
* https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/pull/11443
* https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/pull/11474

For context,
https://github.com/RustPython/RustPython/pull/4519/files#diff-5de40045e78e794aa5ab0b8aacf531aa477daf826d31ca129467703855408220
added support for soft keywords in the parser which uses infinite
lookahead to classify a soft keyword as a keyword or an identifier. This
is a brilliant idea as it basically wraps the existing Lexer and works
on top of it which means that the logic for lexing and re-lexing a soft
keyword remains separate. The change here is to remove
`SoftKeywordTransformer` and let the parser determine this based on
context, lookahead and speculative parsing.

* **Context:** The transformer needs to know the position of the lexer
between it being at a statement position or a simple statement position.
This is because a `match` token starts a compound statement while a
`type` token starts a simple statement. **The parser already knows
this.**
* **Lookahead:** Now that the parser knows the context it can perform
lookahead of up to two tokens to classify the soft keyword. The logic
for this is mentioned in the PR implementing it for `type` and `match
soft keyword.
* **Speculative parsing:** This is where the checkpoint - rewind
infrastructure helps. For `match` soft keyword, there are certain cases
for which we can't classify based on lookahead. The idea here is to
create a checkpoint and keep parsing. Based on whether the parsing was
successful and what tokens are ahead we can classify the remaining
cases. Refer to #11443 for more details.

If the soft keyword is being parsed in an identifier context, it'll be
converted to an identifier and the emitted token will be updated as
well. Refer
8196720f80/crates/ruff_python_parser/src/parser/expression.rs (L487-L491).

The `case` soft keyword doesn't require any special handling because
it'll be a keyword only in the context of a match statement.

### Update the parser API

* https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/pull/11494
* https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/pull/11505

Now that the lexer is in sync with the parser, and the parser helps to
determine whether a soft keyword is a keyword or an identifier, the
lexer cannot be used on its own. The reason being that it's not
sensitive to the context (which is correct). This means that the parser
API needs to be updated to not allow any access to the lexer.

Previously, there were multiple ways to parse the source code:
1. Passing the source code itself
2. Or, passing the tokens

Now that the lexer and parser are working together, the API
corresponding to (2) cannot exists. The final API is mentioned in this
PR description: https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/pull/11494.

### Refactor the downstream tools (linter and formatter)

* https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/pull/11511
* https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/pull/11515
* https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/pull/11529
* https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/pull/11562
* https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/pull/11592

And, the final set of changes involves updating all references of the
lexer and `Tok` enum. This was done in two-parts:
1. Update all the references in a way that doesn't require any changes
from this PR i.e., it can be done independently
	* https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/pull/11402
	* https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/pull/11406
	* https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/pull/11418
	* https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/pull/11419
	* https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/pull/11420
	* https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/pull/11424
2. Update all the remaining references to use the changes made in this
PR

For (2), there were various strategies used:
1. Introduce a new `Tokens` struct which wraps the token vector and add
methods to query a certain subset of tokens. These includes:
	1. `up_to_first_unknown` which replaces the `tokenize` function
2. `in_range` and `after` which replaces the `lex_starts_at` function
where the former returns the tokens within the given range while the
latter returns all the tokens after the given offset
2. Introduce a new `TokenFlags` which is a set of flags to query certain
information from a token. Currently, this information is only limited to
any string type token but can be expanded to include other information
in the future as needed. https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/pull/11578
3. Move the `CommentRanges` to the parsed output because this
information is common to both the linter and the formatter. This removes
the need for `tokens_and_ranges` function.

## Test Plan

- [x] Update and verify the test snapshots
- [x] Make sure the entire test suite is passing
- [x] Make sure there are no changes in the ecosystem checks
- [x] Run the fuzzer on the parser
- [x] Run this change on dozens of open-source projects

### Running this change on dozens of open-source projects

Refer to the PR description to get the list of open source projects used
for testing.

Now, the following tests were done between `main` and this branch:
1. Compare the output of `--select=E999` (syntax errors)
2. Compare the output of default rule selection
3. Compare the output of `--select=ALL`

**Conclusion: all output were same**

## What's next?

The next step is to introduce re-lexing logic and update the parser to
feed the recovery information to the lexer so that it can emit the
correct token. This moves us one step closer to having error resilience
in the parser and provides Ruff the possibility to lint even if the
source code contains syntax errors.
2024-06-03 18:23:50 +05:30
Dhruv Manilawala
13ffb5bc19
Replace LALRPOP parser with hand-written parser (#10036)
(Supersedes #9152, authored by @LaBatata101)

## Summary

This PR replaces the current parser generated from LALRPOP to a
hand-written recursive descent parser.

It also updates the grammar for [PEP
646](https://peps.python.org/pep-0646/) so that the parser outputs the
correct AST. For example, in `data[*x]`, the index expression is now a
tuple with a single starred expression instead of just a starred
expression.

Beyond the performance improvements, the parser is also error resilient
and can provide better error messages. The behavior as seen by any
downstream tools isn't changed. That is, the linter and formatter can
still assume that the parser will _stop_ at the first syntax error. This
will be updated in the following months.

For more details about the change here, refer to the PR corresponding to
the individual commits and the release blog post.

## Test Plan

Write _lots_ and _lots_ of tests for both valid and invalid syntax and
verify the output.

## Acknowledgements

- @MichaReiser for reviewing 100+ parser PRs and continuously providing
guidance throughout the project
- @LaBatata101 for initiating the transition to a hand-written parser in
#9152
- @addisoncrump for implementing the fuzzer which helped
[catch](https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/pull/10903)
[a](https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/pull/10910)
[lot](https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/pull/10966)
[of](https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/pull/10896)
[bugs](https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/pull/10877)

---------

Co-authored-by: Victor Hugo Gomes <labatata101@linuxmail.org>
Co-authored-by: Micha Reiser <micha@reiser.io>
2024-04-18 17:57:39 +05:30