<!--
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?
-->
Fixes#6611
## Summary
This lint rule spots comments that are _intended_ to suppress or enable
the formatter, but will be ignored by the Ruff formatter.
We borrow some functions the formatter uses for determining comment
placement / putting them in context within an AST.
The analysis function uses an AST visitor to visit each comment and
attach it to the AST. It then uses that context to check:
1. Is this comment in an expression?
2. Does this comment have bad placement? (e.g. a `# fmt: skip` above a
function instead of at the end of a line)
3. Is this comment redundant?
4. Does this comment actually suppress any code?
5. Does this comment have ambiguous placement? (e.g. a `# fmt: off`
above an `else:` block)
If any of these are true, a violation is thrown. The reported reason
depends on the order of the above check-list: in other words, a `# fmt:
skip` comment on its own line within a list expression will be reported
as being in an expression, since that reason takes priority.
The lint suggests removing the comment as an unsafe fix, regardless of
the reason.
## Test Plan
A snapshot test has been created.
## Summary
Adapts the fix for rule B006 to no longer modify the body of function
stubs, while retaining the change in method signature.
## Test Plan
The existing tests for B006 were adapted to reflect this change in
behavior.
## Relevant issue
https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/issues/10083
## Summary
The `lxml` library has been modified to address known vulnerabilities
and unsafe defaults. As such, the `defusedxml`
library is no longer necessary, `defusedxml` has deprecated its `lxml`
module.
Closes https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/issues/10030.
## Summary
Currently, rule `RUF015` is not able to detect the usage of
`list(iterable).pop(0)` falling under the category of an _unnecessary
iterable allocation for accessing the first element_. This PR wants to
change that. See the underlying issue for more details.
* Provide extension to detect `list(iterable).pop(0)`, but not
`list(iterable).pop(i)` where i > 1
* Update corresponding doc
## Test Plan
* `RUF015.py` and the corresponding snap file were extended such that
their correspond to the new behaviour
Closes https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/issues/9190
---
PS: I've only been working on this ticket as I haven't seen any activity
from issue assignee @rmad17, neither in this repo nor in a fork. I hope
I interpreted his inactivity correctly. Didn't mean to steal his chance.
Since I stumbled across the underlying problem myself, I wanted to offer
a solution as soon as possible.
## Summary
It is a convention to use the `_()` alias for `gettext()`. We want to
avoid
statement expressions and assignments related to aliases of the gettext
API.
See https://docs.python.org/3/library/gettext.html for details. When one
uses `_() to mark a string for translation, the tools look for these
markers
and replace the original string with its translated counterpart. If the
string contains variable placeholders or formatting, it can complicate
the
translation process, lead to errors or incorrect translations.
## Test Plan
* Test file `RUF027_1.py` was extended such that the test reproduces the
false-positive
Closes https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/issues/10023.
---------
Co-authored-by: Charlie Marsh <charlie.r.marsh@gmail.com>
## Summary
The original implementation of this applied the runtime-required context
to definitions _within_ the function, but not the signature itself. (We
had test coverage; the snapshot was just correctly showing the wrong
outcome.)
Closes https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/issues/10089.
## Summary
Update PLR1714 to ignore `sys.platform` and `sys.version` checks.
I'm not sure if these checks or if we need to add more. Please advise.
Fixes#10017
## Test Plan
Added a new test case and ran `cargo nextest run`
## Summary
Allows, e.g.:
```python
import os
os.environ["WORLD_SIZE"] = "1"
os.putenv("CUDA_VISIBLE_DEVICES", "4")
import torch
```
For now, this is only allowed in preview.
Closes https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/issues/10059
## Summary
Closes#10031
- Detect commented out `case` statements. Playground repro:
https://play.ruff.rs/5a305aa9-6e5c-4fa4-999a-8fc427ab9a23
- Add more support for one-line commented out code.
## Test Plan
Unit tested and tested with
```sh
cargo run -p ruff -- check crates/ruff_linter/resources/test/fixtures/eradicate/ERA001.py --no-cache --preview --select ERA001
```
TODO:
- [x] `cargo insta test`
## Summary
Part of #7595
This PR moves the `RUF001` and `RUF002` rules to the AST checker. This
removes the use of docstring detection from these rules.
## Test Plan
As this is just a refactor, make sure existing test cases pass.
## Summary
Fixes#9895
The cause for this panic came from an offset error in the code. When
analyzing a hypothetical f-string, we attempt to re-parse it as an
f-string, and use the AST data to determine, among other things, whether
the format specifiers are correct. To determine the 'correctness' of a
format specifier, we actually have to re-parse the format specifier, and
this is where the issue lies. To get the source text for the specifier,
we were taking a slice from the original file source text... even though
the AST data for the specifier belongs to the standalone parsed f-string
expression, meaning that the ranges are going to be way off. In a file
with Unicode, this can cause panics if the slice is inside a char
boundary.
To fix this, we now slice from the temporary source we created earlier
to parse the literal as an f-string.
## Test Plan
The RUF027 snapshot test was amended to include a string with format
specifiers which we _should_ be calling out. This is to ensure we do
slice format specifiers from the source text correctly.
## Summary
Ignore `async for` loops when checking the SIM113 rule.
Closes#9995
## Test Plan
A new test case was added to SIM113.py with an async for loop.
## Summary
This PR introduces a new semantic model flag `DOCSTRING` which suggests
that the model is currently in a module / class / function docstring.
This is the first step in eliminating the docstring detection state
machine which is prone to bugs as stated in #7595.
## Test Plan
~TODO: Is there a way to add a test case for this?~
I tested this using the following code snippet and adding a print
statement in the `string_like` analyzer to print if we're currently in a
docstring or not.
<details><summary>Test code snippet:</summary>
<p>
```python
"Docstring" ", still a docstring"
"Not a docstring"
def foo():
"Docstring"
"Not a docstring"
if foo:
"Not a docstring"
pass
class Foo:
"Docstring"
"Not a docstring"
foo: int
"Unofficial variable docstring"
def method():
"Docstring"
"Not a docstring"
pass
def bar():
"Not a docstring".strip()
def baz():
_something_else = 1
"""Not a docstring"""
```
</p>
</details>
## Summary
Implement [implicit readlines
(FURB129)](https://github.com/dosisod/refurb/blob/master/refurb/checks/iterable/implicit_readlines.py)
lint.
## Notes
I need a help/an opinion about suggested implementations.
This implementation differs from the original one from `refurb` in the
following way. This implementation checks syntactically the call of the
method with the name `readlines()` inside `for` {loop|generator
expression}. The implementation from refurb also
[checks](https://github.com/dosisod/refurb/blob/master/refurb/checks/iterable/implicit_readlines.py#L43)
that callee is a variable with a type `io.TextIOWrapper` or
`io.BufferedReader`.
- I do not see a simple way to implement the same logic.
- The best I can have is something like
```rust
checker.semantic().binding(checker.semantic().resolve_name(attr_expr.value.as_name_expr()?)?).statement(checker.semantic())
```
and analyze cases. But this will be not about types, but about guessing
the type by assignment (or with) expression.
- Also this logic has several false negatives, when the callee is not a
variable, but the result of function call (e.g. `open(...)`).
- On the other side, maybe it is good to lint this on other things,
where this suggestion is not safe, and push the developers to change
their interfaces to be less surprising, comparing with the standard
library.
- Anyway while the current implementation has false-positives (I
mentioned some of them in the test) I marked the fixes to be unsafe.
## Summary
Accept 0.0 and 1.0 as common magic values. This is in line with the
pylint behaviour, and I think makes sense conceptually.
## Test Plan
Test cases were added to
`crates/ruff_linter/resources/test/fixtures/pylint/magic_value_comparison.py`
## Summary
I was surprised to learn that we treat `x` in `[_ for x in y]` as an
"assignment" binding kind, rather than a dedicated comprehension
variable.
The docs previously mentioned an irrelevant config option, but were
missing a link to the relevant `ignore-init-module-imports` config
option which _is_ actually used.
Additionally, this commit adds a link to the documentation to explain
the conventions around a module interface which includes using a
redundant import alias to preserve an unused import.
(noticed this while filing #9962)
## Summary
This PR renames the semantic model flag `MODULE_DOCSTRING` to
`MODULE_DOCSTRING_BOUNDARY`. The main reason is for readability and for
the new semantic model flag `DOCSTRING` which tracks that the model is
in a module / class / function docstring.
I got confused earlier with the name until I looked at the use case and
it seems that the `_BOUNDARY` prefix is more appropriate for the
use-case and is consistent with other flags.
## Summary
This PR ensures that if a list `x` is modified within a `for` loop, we
avoid flagging `list(x)` as unnecessary. Previously, we only detected
calls to exactly `.append`, and they couldn't be nested within other
statements.
Closes https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/issues/9925.
## Summary
If these are defined within class scopes, they're actually attributes of
the class, and can be accessed through the class itself.
(We preserve our existing behavior for `.pyi` files.)
Closes https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/issues/9948.
Fixes#8368
Fixes https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/issues/9186
## Summary
Arbitrary TOML strings can be provided via the command-line to override
configuration options in `pyproject.toml` or `ruff.toml`. As an example:
to run over typeshed and respect typeshed's `pyproject.toml`, but
override a specific isort setting and enable an additional pep8-naming
setting:
```
cargo run -- check ../typeshed --no-cache --config ../typeshed/pyproject.toml --config "lint.isort.combine-as-imports=false" --config "lint.extend-select=['N801']"
```
---------
Co-authored-by: Micha Reiser <micha@reiser.io>
Co-authored-by: Zanie Blue <contact@zanie.dev>
## Summary
Currently these rules apply the heuristic that if the original sequence
doesn't have a newline in between the final sequence item and the
closing parenthesis, the autofix won't add one for you. The feedback
from @ThiefMaster, however, was that this was producing slightly unusual
formatting -- things like this:
```py
__all__ = [
"b", "c",
"a", "d"]
```
were being autofixed to this:
```py
__all__ = [
"a",
"b",
"c",
"d"]
```
When, if it was _going_ to be exploded anyway, they'd prefer something
like this (with the closing parenthesis on its own line, and a trailing comma added):
```py
__all__ = [
"a",
"b",
"c",
"d",
]
```
I'm still pretty skeptical that we'll be able to please everybody here
with the formatting choices we make; _but_, on the other hand, this
_specific_ change is pretty easy to make.
## Test Plan
`cargo test`. I also ran the autofixes for RUF022 and RUF023 on CPython
to check how they looked; they looked fine to me.
## Summary
If a generic appears multiple times on the right-hand side, we should
only include it once on the left-hand side when rewriting.
Closes https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/issues/9904.
## Summary
This review contains a fix for
[D405](https://docs.astral.sh/ruff/rules/capitalize-section-name/)
(capitalize-section-name)
The problem is that Ruff considers the sub-section header as a normal
section if it has the same name as some section name. For instance, a
function/method has an argument named "parameters". This only applies if
you use Numpy style docstring.
See: [ISSUE](https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/issues/9806)
The following will not raise D405 after the fix:
```python
def some_function(parameters: list[str]):
"""A function with a parameters parameter
Parameters
----------
parameters:
A list of string parameters
"""
...
```
## Test Plan
```bash
cargo test
```
---------
Co-authored-by: Mikko Leppänen <mikko.leppanen@vaisala.com>
Co-authored-by: Charlie Marsh <charlie.r.marsh@gmail.com>
## Summary
This PR reduces the size of `Expr` from 80 to 64 bytes, by reducing the
sizes of...
- `ExprCall` from 72 to 56 bytes, by using boxed slices for `Arguments`.
- `ExprCompare` from 64 to 48 bytes, by using boxed slices for its
various vectors.
In testing, the parser gets a bit faster, and the linter benchmarks
improve quite a bit.
