Commit graph

5 commits

Author SHA1 Message Date
𝕂
793ff9bdbc
Fix false positive in for mutations in return statements (B909) (#18408)
Some checks are pending
CI / Determine changes (push) Waiting to run
CI / cargo fmt (push) Waiting to run
CI / cargo clippy (push) Blocked by required conditions
CI / cargo test (linux) (push) Blocked by required conditions
CI / cargo test (linux, release) (push) Blocked by required conditions
CI / cargo test (windows) (push) Blocked by required conditions
CI / cargo test (wasm) (push) Blocked by required conditions
CI / cargo build (release) (push) Waiting to run
CI / cargo build (msrv) (push) Blocked by required conditions
CI / cargo fuzz build (push) Blocked by required conditions
CI / fuzz parser (push) Blocked by required conditions
CI / test scripts (push) Blocked by required conditions
CI / mkdocs (push) Waiting to run
CI / ecosystem (push) Blocked by required conditions
CI / Fuzz for new ty panics (push) Blocked by required conditions
CI / cargo shear (push) Blocked by required conditions
CI / python package (push) Waiting to run
CI / pre-commit (push) Waiting to run
CI / formatter instabilities and black similarity (push) Blocked by required conditions
CI / test ruff-lsp (push) Blocked by required conditions
CI / check playground (push) Blocked by required conditions
CI / benchmarks (push) Blocked by required conditions
[ty Playground] Release / publish (push) Waiting to run
<!--
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

Fixes false positive in B909 (`loop-iterator-mutation`) where mutations
inside return/break statements were incorrectly flagged as violations.
The fix adds tracking for when mutations occur within return/break
statements and excludes them from violation detection, as they don't
cause the iteration issues B909 is designed to prevent.



## Test Plan

- Added test cases covering the reported false positive scenarios to
`B909.py`
  - Verified existing B909 tests continue to pass (no regressions)
  - Ran `cargo test -p ruff_linter --lib flake8_bugbear` successfully

Fixes #18399
2025-06-13 10:39:55 -04:00
Charlie Marsh
c858afe03a
[flake8-bugbear] Treat return as equivalent to break (B909) (#12646)
Closes https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/issues/12640.
2024-08-02 18:14:17 -04:00
Charlie Marsh
1435b0f022
Remove discard, remove, and pop allowance for loop-iterator-mutation (#12365)
## Summary

Pretty sure this should still be an error, but also, I think I added
this because of ecosystem CI? So want to see what pops up.

Closes https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/issues/12164.
2024-07-17 17:42:14 +00:00
Charlie Marsh
1de8ff3308
Detect enumerate iterations in loop-iterator-mutation (#12366)
## Summary

Closes https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/issues/12164.
2024-07-17 12:03:36 -04:00
Martin Imre
03899dcba3
[flake8-bugbear] Implement loop-iterator-mutation (B909) (#9578)
## Summary
This PR adds the implementation for the current
[flake8-bugbear](https://github.com/PyCQA/flake8-bugbear)'s B038 rule.
The B038 rule checks for mutation of loop iterators in the body of a for
loop and alerts when found.

Rational: 
Editing the loop iterator can lead to undesired behavior and is probably
a bug in most cases.

Closes #9511.

Note there will be a second iteration of B038 implemented in
`flake8-bugbear` soon, and this PR currently only implements the weakest
form of the rule.
I'd be happy to also implement the further improvements to B038 here in
ruff 🙂
See https://github.com/PyCQA/flake8-bugbear/issues/454 for more
information on the planned improvements.

## Test Plan
Re-using the same test file that I've used for `flake8-bugbear`, which
is included in this PR (look for the `B038.py` file).


Note: this is my first time using `rust` (beside `rustlings`) - I'd be
very happy about thorough feedback on what I could've done better
🙂 - Bring it on 😀
2024-04-11 19:52:52 +00:00