<!--
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
<!-- What's the purpose of the change? What does it do, and why? -->
The existing implementation of RUF060 (InEmptyCollection) is not
recursive, meaning that although set([]) results in an empty collection,
the existing code fails it because set is taking an argument.
The updated implementation allows set and frozenset to take empty
collection as positional argument (which results in empty
set/frozenset).
## Test Plan
Added test cases for recursive cases + updated snapshot (see RUF060.py).
---------
Co-authored-by: Marcus Näslund <marcus.naslund@kognity.com>
<!--
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
<!-- What's the purpose of the change? What does it do, and why? -->
Fixes#17776.
This PR also handles all other `PTH*` rules that don't support file
descriptors.
## Test Plan
<!-- How was it tested? -->
Update existing tests.
<!--
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
We can only guarantee the safety of the autofix for number literals, all
other cases may change the runtime behaviour of the program or introduce
a syntax error. For the cases reported in the issue that would result in
a syntax error, I disabled the autofix.
Follow-up of #17661.
Fixes#16472.
<!-- What's the purpose of the change? What does it do, and why? -->
## Test Plan
Snapshot tests.
<!-- How was it tested? -->
Re: #17526
## Summary
Add integration test for semantic syntax for `IrrefutableCasePattern`,
`SingleStarredAssignment`, `WriteToDebug`, and `InvalidExpression`.
## Notes
- Following @ntBre's suggestion, I will keep the test coming in batches
like this over the next few days in separate PRs to keep the review load
per PR manageable while also not spamming too many.
- I did not add a test for `del __debug__` which is one of the examples
in `crates/ruff_python_parser/src/semantic_errors.rs:1051`.
For python version `<= 3.8` there is no error and for `>=3.9` the error
is not `WriteToDebug` but `SyntaxError: cannot delete __debug__ on
Python 3.9 (syntax was removed in 3.9)`.
- The `blacken-docs` bypass is necessary because otherwise the test does
not pass pre-commit checks; but we want to check for this faulty syntax.
<!-- What's the purpose of the change? What does it do, and why? -->
## Test Plan
This is a test.
<!--
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
<!-- What's the purpose of the change? What does it do, and why? -->
* `airflow.models.Connection` → `airflow.sdk.Connection`
* `airflow.models.Variable` → `airflow.sdk.Variable`
## Test Plan
<!-- How was it tested? -->
The test fixtures has been updated (see the first commit for easier
review)
## Summary
This PR is a first step toward integration of the new `Diagnostic` type
into ruff. There are two main changes:
- A new `UnifiedFile` enum wrapping `File` for red-knot and a
`SourceFile` for ruff
- ruff's `Message::SyntaxError` variant is now a `Diagnostic` instead of
a `SyntaxErrorMessage`
The second of these changes was mostly just a proof of concept for the
first, and it went pretty smoothly. Converting `DiagnosticMessage`s will
be most of the work in replacing `Message` entirely.
## Test Plan
Existing tests, which show no changes.
---------
Co-authored-by: Carl Meyer <carl@astral.sh>
Co-authored-by: Micha Reiser <micha@reiser.io>
## Summary
This PR partially addresses #16418 via the following:
- `LinterSettings::unresolved_python_version` is now a `TargetVersion`,
which is a thin wrapper around an `Option<PythonVersion>`
- `Checker::target_version` now calls `TargetVersion::linter_version`
internally, which in turn uses `unwrap_or_default` to preserve the
current default behavior
- Calls to the parser now call `TargetVersion::parser_version`, which
calls `unwrap_or_else(PythonVersion::latest)`
- The `Checker`'s implementation of
`SemanticSyntaxContext::python_version` also uses
`TargetVersion::parser_version` to use `PythonVersion::latest` for
semantic errors
In short, all lint rule behavior should be unchanged, but we default to
the latest Python version for the new syntax errors, which should
minimize confusing version-related syntax errors for users without a
version configured.
## Test Plan
Existing tests, which showed no changes (except for printing default
settings).
## Summary
Introducing a new rule based on discussions in #15732 and #15729 that
checks for unnecessary in with empty collections.
I called it in_empty_collection and gave the rule number RUF060.
Rule is in preview group.
The PR add the fix safety section for rule `RUF013`
(https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/issues/15584 )
The fix was introduced here #4831
The rule as a lot of False Negative (as it is explained in the docs of
the rule).
The main reason because the fix is unsafe is that it could change code
generation tools behaviour, as in the example here:
```python
def generate_api_docs(func):
hints = get_type_hints(func)
for param, hint in hints.items():
if is_optional_type(hint):
print(f"Parameter '{param}' is optional")
else:
print(f"Parameter '{param}' is required")
# Before fix
def create_user(name: str, roles: list[str] = None):
pass
# After fix
def create_user(name: str, roles: Optional[list[str]] = None):
pass
# Generated docs would change from "roles is required" to "roles is optional"
```
<!--
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?
-->
Re: #17526
## Summary
Add test fixtures for `AwaitOutsideAsync` and
`AsyncComprehensionOutsideAsyncFunction` errors.
<!-- What's the purpose of the change? What does it do, and why? -->
## Test Plan
This is a test.
<!-- How was it tested? -->
Re: #17526
## Summary
Add integration tests for Python Semantic Syntax for
`InvalidStarExpression`, `DuplicateMatchKey`, and
`DuplicateMatchClassAttribute`.
## Note
- Red knot integration tests for `DuplicateMatchKey` exist already in
line 89-101.
<!-- What's the purpose of the change? What does it do, and why? -->
## Test Plan
This is a test.
<!-- How was it tested? -->
When attempting to determine whether `import foo.bar.baz` is a known
first-party import relative to [user-provided source
paths](https://docs.astral.sh/ruff/settings/#src), when `preview` is
enabled we now check that `SRC/foo/bar/baz` is a directory or
`SRC/foo/bar/baz.py` or `SRC/foo/bar/baz.pyi` exist.
Previously, we just checked the analogous thing for `SRC/foo`, but this
can be misleading in situations with disjoint namespace packages that
share a common base name (e.g. we may be working inside the namespace
package `foo.buzz` and importing `foo.bar` from elsewhere).
Supersedes #12987Closes#12984
<!--
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
Fixes#17798
<!-- What's the purpose of the change? What does it do, and why? -->
## Test Plan
Snapshot tests
<!-- How was it tested? -->
<!--
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
<!-- What's the purpose of the change? What does it do, and why? -->
Skip attribute check in try catch block (`AIR301`)
## Test Plan
<!-- How was it tested? -->
update
`crates/ruff_linter/resources/test/fixtures/airflow/AIR301_names_try.py`
<!--
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
<!-- What's the purpose of the change? What does it do, and why? -->
Remove `airflow.utils.dag_parsing_context.get_parsing_context` from
AIR301 as it has been moved to AIR311
## Test Plan
<!-- How was it tested? -->
the test fixture was updated in the previous PR
This PR updates the semantic model for Python 3.14 by essentially
equating "run using Python 3.14" with "uses `from __future__ import
annotations`".
While this is not technically correct under the hood, it appears to be
correct for the purposes of our semantic model. That is: from the point
of view of deciding when to parse, bind, etc. annotations, these two
contexts behave the same. More generally these contexts behave the same
unless you are performing some kind of introspection like the following:
Without future import:
```pycon
>>> from annotationlib import get_annotations,Format
>>> def foo()->Bar:...
...
>>> get_annotations(foo,format=Format.FORWARDREF)
{'return': ForwardRef('Bar')}
>>> get_annotations(foo,format=Format.STRING)
{'return': 'Bar'}
>>> get_annotations(foo,format=Format.VALUE)
Traceback (most recent call last):
[...]
NameError: name 'Bar' is not defined
>>> get_annotations(foo)
Traceback (most recent call last):
[...]
NameError: name 'Bar' is not defined
```
With future import:
```
>>> from __future__ import annotations
>>> from annotationlib import get_annotations,Format
>>> def foo()->Bar:...
...
>>> get_annotations(foo,format=Format.FORWARDREF)
{'return': 'Bar'}
>>> get_annotations(foo,format=Format.STRING)
{'return': 'Bar'}
>>> get_annotations(foo,format=Format.VALUE)
{'return': 'Bar'}
>>> get_annotations(foo)
{'return': 'Bar'}
```
(Note: the result of the last call to `get_annotations` in these
examples relies on the fact that, as of this writing, the default value
for `format` is `Format.VALUE`).
If one day we support lint rules targeting code that introspects using
the new `annotationlib`, then it is possible we will need to revisit our
approximation.
Closes#15100
## Summary
Contains the same changes to the semantic type inference as
https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/pull/17705.
Fixes#17694
<!-- What's the purpose of the change? What does it do, and why? -->
## Test Plan
<!-- How was it tested? -->
Snapshot tests.
---------
Co-authored-by: Dhruv Manilawala <dhruvmanila@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Brent Westbrook <brentrwestbrook@gmail.com>
## Summary
<!-- What's the purpose of the change? What does it do, and why? -->
This is not yet fixing anything as the names are not changed, but it
lays down the foundation for fixing.
## Test Plan
<!-- How was it tested? -->
the existing test fixture should already cover this change
Re: #17526
## Summary
Adds tests to red knot and `linter.rs` for the semantic syntax.
Specifically add tests for `ReboundComprehensionVariable`,
`DuplicateTypeParameter`, and `MultipleCaseAssignment`.
Refactor the `test_async_comprehension_in_sync_comprehension` →
`test_semantic_error` to be more general for all semantic syntax test
cases.
## Test Plan
This is a test.
## Question
I'm happy to contribute more tests the coming days.
Should that happen here or should we merge this PR such that the
refactor `test_async_comprehension_in_sync_comprehension` →
`test_semantic_error` is available on main and others can chime in, too?
## Summary
Includes minor changes to the semantic type inference to help detect the
return type of function call.
Fixes#17691
## Test Plan
Snapshot tests
A small PR that just updates the various settings/configurations to
allow Python 3.14. At the moment selecting that target version will
have no impact compared to Python 3.13 - except that a warning
is emitted if the user does so with `preview` disabled.
## Summary
<!-- What's the purpose of the change? What does it do, and why? -->
Apply auto fixes to cases where the names have changed in Airflow 3 in
AIR302 and split the huge test cases into different test cases based on
proivder
## Test Plan
<!-- How was it tested? -->
the test cases has been split into multiple for easier checking
Summary
--
This PR resolves https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/issues/9761 by adding
a linter configuration option to disable
`typing_extensions` imports. As mentioned [here], it would be ideal if
we could
detect whether or not `typing_extensions` is available as a dependency
automatically, but this seems like a much easier fix in the meantime.
The default for the new option, `typing-extensions`, is `true`,
preserving the current behavior. Setting it to `false` will bail out of
the new
`Checker::typing_importer` method, which has been refactored from the
`Checker::import_from_typing` method in
https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/pull/17340),
with `None`, which is then handled specially by each rule that calls it.
I considered some alternatives to a config option, such as checking if
`typing_extensions` has been imported or checking for a `TYPE_CHECKING`
block we could use, but I think defaulting to allowing
`typing_extensions` imports and allowing the user to disable this with
an option is both simple to implement and pretty intuitive.
[here]:
https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/issues/9761#issuecomment-2790492853
Test Plan
--
New linter tests exercising several combinations of Python versions and
the new config option for PYI019. I also added tests for the other
affected rules, but only in the case where the new config option is
enabled. The rules' existing tests also cover the default case.
This PR promotes the fix applicability of [readlines-in-for
(FURB129)](https://docs.astral.sh/ruff/rules/readlines-in-for/#readlines-in-for-furb129)
to always safe.
In the original PR (https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/pull/9880), the
author marked the rule as unsafe because Ruff's type inference couldn't
quite guarantee that we had an `IOBase` object in hand. Some false
positives were recorded in the test fixture. However, before the PR was
merged, Charlie added the necessary type inference and the false
positives went away.
According to the [Python
documentation](https://docs.python.org/3/library/io.html#io.IOBase), I
believe this fix is safe for any proper implementation of `IOBase`:
>[IOBase](https://docs.python.org/3/library/io.html#io.IOBase) (and its
subclasses) supports the iterator protocol, meaning that an
[IOBase](https://docs.python.org/3/library/io.html#io.IOBase) object can
be iterated over yielding the lines in a stream. Lines are defined
slightly differently depending on whether the stream is a binary stream
(yielding bytes), or a text stream (yielding character strings). See
[readline()](https://docs.python.org/3/library/io.html#io.IOBase.readline)
below.
and then in the [documentation for
`readlines`](https://docs.python.org/3/library/io.html#io.IOBase.readlines):
>Read and return a list of lines from the stream. hint can be specified
to control the number of lines read: no more lines will be read if the
total size (in bytes/characters) of all lines so far exceeds hint. [...]
>Note that it’s already possible to iterate on file objects using for
line in file: ... without calling file.readlines().
I believe that a careful reading of our [versioning
policy](https://docs.astral.sh/ruff/versioning/#version-changes)
requires that this change be deferred to a minor release - but please
correct me if I'm wrong!
This PR collects all behavior gated under preview into a new module
`ruff_linter::preview` that exposes functions like
`is_my_new_feature_enabled` - just as is done in the formatter crate.
