The PR fixes#16457 .
Specifically, `FURB161` is marked safe, but the rule generates safe
fixes only in specific cases. Therefore, we attempt to mark the fix as
unsafe when we are not in one of these cases.
For instances, the fix is marked as aunsafe just in case of strings (as
pointed out in the issue). Let me know if I should change something.
---------
Co-authored-by: Brent Westbrook <brentrwestbrook@gmail.com>
Fixes false negative when slice bound uses length of string literal.
We were meant to check the following, for example. Given:
```python
text[:bound] if text.endswith(suffix) else text
```
We want to know whether:
- `suffix` is a string literal and `bound` is a number literal
- `suffix` is an expression and `bound` is
exactly `-len(suffix)` (as AST nodes, prior to evaluation.)
The issue is that negative number literals like `-10` are stored as
unary operators applied to a number literal in the AST. So when `suffix`
was a string literal but `bound` was `-len(suffix)` we were getting
caught in the match arm where `bound` needed to be a number. This is now
fixed with a guard.
Closes#16231
## Summary
Added checks for subscript expressions on builtin classes as in FURB189.
The object is changed to use the collections objects and the types from
the subscript are kept.
Resolves#16130
> Note: Added some comments in the code explaining why
## Test Plan
- Added a subscript dict and list class to the test file.
- Tested locally to check that the symbols are changed and the types are
kept.
- No modifications changed on optional `str` values.
## Summary
Resolves#15936.
The fixes will now attempt to preserve the original iterable's format
and quote it if necessary. For `FURB142`, comments within the fix range
will make it unsafe as well.
## Test Plan
`cargo nextest run` and `cargo insta test`.
## Summary
Follow-up to #15779.
Prior to this change, non-name expressions are not reported at all:
```python
type(a.b) is type(None) # no error
```
This change enhances the rule so that such cases are also reported in
preview. Additionally:
* The fix will now be marked as unsafe if there are any comments within
its range.
* Error messages are slightly modified.
## Test Plan
`cargo nextest run` and `cargo insta test`.
---------
Co-authored-by: Alex Waygood <Alex.Waygood@Gmail.com>
## Summary
Resolves#10063 and follow-up to #15521.
The fix is now marked as unsafe if there are any comments within its
range. Tests are adapted from that of #15521.
## Test Plan
`cargo nextest run` and `cargo insta test`.
This PR extends the Decimal parsing used in [verbose-decimal-constructor
(FURB157)](https://docs.astral.sh/ruff/rules/verbose-decimal-constructor/)
to better handle non-finite `Decimal` objects, avoiding some false
negatives.
Closes#14587
---------
Co-authored-by: Micha Reiser <micha@reiser.io>
## Summary
It's only safe to enforce the `x in "1234567890"` case if `x` is exactly
one character, since the set on the right has been reordered as compared
to `string.digits`. We can't know if `x` is exactly one character unless
it's a literal. And if it's a literal, well, it's kind of silly code in
the first place?
Closes https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/issues/13802.
This PR accounts for further subtleties in `Decimal` parsing:
- Strings which are empty modulo underscores and surrounding whitespace
are skipped
- `Decimal("-0")` is skipped
- `Decimal("{integer literal that is longer than 640 digits}")` are
skipped (see linked issue for explanation)
NB: The snapshot did not need to be updated since the new test cases are
"Ok" instances and added below the diff.
Closes#14204
## Summary
Implementation for one of the rules in
https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/issues/1348
Refurb only deals only with classes with a single base, however the rule
is valid for any base.
(`str, Enum` is common prior to `StrEnum`)
## Test Plan
`cargo test`
---------
Co-authored-by: Dhruv Manilawala <dhruvmanila@gmail.com>
FURB157 suggests replacing expressions like `Decimal("123")` with
`Decimal(123)`. This PR extends the rule to cover cases where the input
string to `Decimal` can be easily transformed into an integer literal.
For example:
```python
Decimal("1__000") # fix: `Decimal(1000)`
```
Note: we do not implement the full decimal parsing logic from CPython on
the grounds that certain acceptable string inputs to the `Decimal`
constructor may be presumed purposeful on the part of the developer. For
example, as in the linked issue, `Decimal("١٢٣")` is valid and equal to
`Decimal(123)`, but we do not suggest a replacement in this case.
Closes#13807
## Summary
Fixes#10463
Add `FURB192` which detects violations like this:
```python
# Bad
a = sorted(l)[0]
# Good
a = min(l)
```
There is a caveat that @Skylion007 has pointed out, which is that
violations with `reverse=True` technically aren't compatible with this
change, in the edge case where the unstable behavior is intended. For
example:
```python
from operator import itemgetter
data = [('red', 1), ('blue', 1), ('red', 2), ('blue', 2)]
min(data, key=itemgetter(0)) # ('blue', 1)
sorted(data, key=itemgetter(0))[0] # ('blue', 1)
sorted(data, key=itemgetter(0), reverse=True)[-1] # ('blue, 2')
```
This seems like a rare edge case, but I can make the `reverse=True`
fixes unsafe if that's best.
## Test Plan
This is unit tested.
## References
https://github.com/dosisod/refurb/pull/333/files
---------
Co-authored-by: Charlie Marsh <charlie.r.marsh@gmail.com>
## Summary
The `operator.itemgetter` behavior changes where there's more than one
argument, such that `operator.itemgetter(0)` yields `r[0]`, rather than
`(r[0],)`.
Closes https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/issues/11075.
## Summary
Implement `write-whole-file` (`FURB103`), part of #1348. This is largely
a copy and paste of `read-whole-file` #7682.
## Test Plan
Text fixture added.
---------
Co-authored-by: Dhruv Manilawala <dhruvmanila@gmail.com>
## Summary
`Path.read_bytes()` does not support any keyword arguments, so `FURB101`
should not be triggered if the file is opened in `rb` mode with any
keyword arguments.
## Test Plan
Move erroneous test to "Non-error" section of fixture.
## Summary
<!-- What's the purpose of the change? What does it do, and why? -->
Implement FURB164 in the issue #1348.
Relevant Refurb docs is here:
https://github.com/dosisod/refurb/blob/v2.0.0/docs/checks.md#furb164-no-from-float
I've changed the name from `no-from-float` to
`verbose-decimal-fraction-construction`.
## Test Plan
<!-- How was it tested? -->
I've written it in the `FURB164.py`.
---------
Co-authored-by: Charlie Marsh <charlie.r.marsh@gmail.com>
## Summary
We're seeing failures in https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/issues/10470
because `resolve_qualified_import_name` isn't guaranteed to return a
specific import if a symbol is accessible in two ways (e.g., you have
both `import logging` and `from logging import error` in scope, and you
want `logging.error`). This PR breaks up the failing tests such that the
imports aren't in the same scope.
Closes https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/issues/10470.
## Test Plan
I added a `bindings.reverse()` to `resolve_qualified_import_name` to
ensure that the tests pass regardless of the binding order.
## 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.
