## Summary
I used `codespell` and `gramma` to identify mispellings and grammar
errors throughout the codebase and fixed them. I tried not to make any
controversial changes, but feel free to revert as you see fit.
This PR does the plumbing to make a new formatting option,
`docstring-code-format`, available in the configuration for end users.
It is disabled by default (opt-in). It is opt-in at least initially to
reflect a conservative posture. The intent is to make it opt-out at some
point in the future.
This was split out from #8811 in order to make #8811 easier to merge.
Namely, once this is merged, docstring code snippet formatting will
become available to end users. (See comments below for how we arrived at
the name.)
Closes#7146
## Test Plan
Other than the standard test suite, I ran the formatter over the CPython
and polars projects to ensure both that the result looked sensible and
that tests still passed. At time of writing, one issue that currently
appears is that reformatting code snippets trips the long line lint:
1905886802
## Summary
This does the light plumbing necessary to add a new internal option that
permits setting the line width of code examples in docstrings. The plan
is to add the corresponding user facing knob in #8854.
Note that this effectively removes the `same-as-global` configuration
style discussed [in this
comment](https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/issues/8855#issuecomment-1847230440).
It replaces it with the `{integer}` configuration style only.
There are a lot of commits here, but they are each tiny to make review
easier because of the changes to snapshots.
## Test Plan
I added a new docstring test configuration that sets
`docstring-code-line-width = 60` and examined the differences.
## 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.)
This ensures the python label is used for all python code blocks for
consistency.
## Test Plan
Visual inspection of all changes via git client ensuring no other
changes were made in error.
**Summary** Previously, own line comment following after a docstring
followed by newline(s) before the first content statement were treated
as trailing on the docstring and we didn't insert a newline after the
docstring as black would.
Before:
```python
class ModuleBrowser:
"""Browse module classes and functions in IDLE."""
# This class is also the base class for pathbrowser.PathBrowser.
def __init__(self, master, path, *, _htest=False, _utest=False):
pass
```
After:
```python
class ModuleBrowser:
"""Browse module classes and functions in IDLE."""
# This class is also the base class for pathbrowser.PathBrowser.
def __init__(self, master, path, *, _htest=False, _utest=False):
pass
```
I'm not entirely happy about hijacking
`handle_own_line_comment_between_statements`, but i don't know a better
spot to put it.
Fixes#7948
**Test Plan** Fixtures
We previously incorrectly treated byte strings in docstring position as
docstrings because black does so
(https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/pull/8283#discussion_r1375682931,
https://github.com/psf/black/issues/4002), even CPython doesn't
recognize them:
```console
$ python3.12
Python 3.12.0 (main, Oct 6 2023, 17:57:44) [GCC 11.4.0] on linux
Type "help", "copyright", "credits" or "license" for more information.
>>> def f():
... b""" a"""
...
>>> print(str(f.__doc__))
None
```
<!--
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** Implement docstring formatting
**Test Plan** Matches black's `docstring.py` fixture exactly, added some
new cases for what is hard to debug with black and with what black
doesn't cover.
similarity index:
main:
zulip: 0.99702
django: 0.99784
warehouse: 0.99585
build: 0.75623
transformers: 0.99469
cpython: 0.75989
typeshed: 0.74853
this branch:
zulip: 0.99702
django: 0.99784
warehouse: 0.99585
build: 0.75623
transformers: 0.99464
cpython: 0.75517
typeshed: 0.74853
The regression in transformers is actually an improvement in a file they
don't format with black (they run `black examples tests src utils
setup.py conftest.py`, the difference is in hubconf.py). cpython doesn't
use black.
Closes#6196
