## Summary
Stabilizes C420 for the 0.10 release.
## Test Plan
No open issues or PRs (except a general issue about [string
normalization](https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/issues/16579)). The
last (and only) false-negative bug fix was over a month ago.
The tests for this rule were already not on the `preview_rules` test, so
I just changed the `RuleGroup`. The documentation looked okay to me.
## Summary
Resolves#15368.
The following options have been renamed:
* `builtins-allowed-modules` → `allowed-modules`
* `builtins-ignorelist` → `ignorelist`
* `builtins-strict-checking` → `strict-checking`
To preserve compatibility, the old names are kept as Serde aliases.
## Test Plan
`cargo nextest run` and `cargo insta test`.
---------
Co-authored-by: Micha Reiser <micha@reiser.io>
## Summary
`RUF035` has been backported into bandit as `S704` in this
[PR](https://github.com/PyCQA/bandit/pull/1225)
This moves the rule and its corresponding setting to the `flake8-bandit`
category
## Test Plan
`cargo nextest run`
---------
Co-authored-by: Micha Reiser <micha@reiser.io>
## Summary
This came up in https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/issues/16477
It's not obvious from the D417 rule's documentation that it only checks
docstrings
with an arguments section. Functions without such a section aren't
checked.
This PR tries to make this clearer in the documentation.
Summary
--
This is a follow up addressing the comments on #16425. As @dhruvmanila
pointed out, the naming is a bit tricky. I went with `has_no_errors` to
try to differentiate it from `is_valid`. It actually ends up negated in
most uses, so it would be more convenient to have `has_any_errors` or
`has_errors`, but I thought it would sound too much like the opposite of
`is_valid` in that case. I'm definitely open to suggestions here.
Test Plan
--
Existing tests.
## Summary
Resolves#16445.
`UP028` is now no longer always fixable: it will not offer a fix when at
least one `ExprName` target is bound to either a `global` or a
`nonlocal` declaration.
## Test Plan
`cargo nextest run` and `cargo insta test`.
## Summary
Fixes#9381. This PR fixes errors like
```
Cause: error parsing glob '/Users/me/project/{{cookiecutter.project_dirname}}/__pycache__': nested alternate groups are not allowed
```
caused by glob special characters in filenames like
`{{cookiecutter.project_dirname}}`. When the user is matching that
directory exactly, they can use the workaround given by
https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/issues/7959#issuecomment-1764751734,
but that doesn't work for a nested config file with relative paths. For
example, the directory tree in the reproduction repo linked
[here](https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/issues/9381#issuecomment-2677696408):
```
.
├── README.md
├── hello.py
├── pyproject.toml
├── uv.lock
└── {{cookiecutter.repo_name}}
├── main.py
├── pyproject.toml
└── tests
└── maintest.py
```
where the inner `pyproject.toml` contains a relative glob:
```toml
[tool.ruff.lint.per-file-ignores]
"tests/*" = ["F811"]
```
## Test Plan
A new CLI test in both the linter and formatter. The formatter test may
not be necessary because I didn't have to modify any additional code to
pass it, but the original report mentioned both `check` and `format`, so
I wanted to be sure both were fixed.
The PR addresses issue #16396 .
Specifically:
- If the exit statement contains a code keyword argument, it is
converted into a positional argument.
- If retrieving the code from the exit statement is not possible, a
violation is raised without suggesting a fix.
---------
Co-authored-by: Brent Westbrook <36778786+ntBre@users.noreply.github.com>
Split from F841 following discussion in #8884.
Fixes#8884.
<!--
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? -->
Add a new rule for unused assignments in tuples. Remove similar behavior
from F841.
## Test Plan
Adapt F841 tests and move them over to the new rule.
<!-- How was it tested? -->
---------
Co-authored-by: Micha Reiser <micha@reiser.io>
## Summary
Resolves#16374.
`PLW0177` now also reports the pattern of a case branch if it is an
attribute access whose qualified name is that of either `np.nan` or
`math.nan`.
As the rule is in preview, the changes are not preview-gated.
## Test Plan
`cargo nextest run` and `cargo insta test`.
## Summary
This PR builds on the changes in #16220 to pass a target Python version
to the parser. It also adds the `Parser::unsupported_syntax_errors` field, which
collects version-related syntax errors while parsing. These syntax
errors are then turned into `Message`s in ruff (in preview mode).
This PR only detects one syntax error (`match` statement before Python
3.10), but it has been pretty quick to extend to several other simple
errors (see #16308 for example).
## Test Plan
The current tests are CLI tests in the linter crate, but these could be
supplemented with inline parser tests after #16357.
I also tested the display of these syntax errors in VS Code:
---------
Co-authored-by: Alex Waygood <alex.waygood@gmail.com>
I am working on a project that uses ruff linters' docs to generate a
fine-tuning dataset for LLMs.
To achieve this, I first ran the command `ruff rule --all
--output-format json` to retrieve all the rules. Then, I parsed the
explanation field to get these 3 consistent sections:
- `Why is this bad?`
- `What it does`
- `Example`
However, during the initial processing, I noticed that the markdown
headings are not that consistent. For instance:
- In most cases, `Use instead` appears as a normal paragraph within the
`Example` section, but in the file
`crates/ruff_linter/src/rules/flake8_bandit/rules/django_extra.rs` it is
a level-2 heading
- The heading "What it does**?**" is used in some places, while others
consistently use "What it does"
- There are 831 `Example` headings and 65 `Examples`. But all of them
only have one example case
This PR normalized these across all rules.
## Test Plan
CI are passed.
## Summary
This PR is another step in preparing to detect syntax errors in the
parser. It introduces the new `per-file-target-version` top-level
configuration option, which holds a mapping of compiled glob patterns to
Python versions. I intend to use the
`LinterSettings::resolve_target_version` method here to pass to the
parser:
f50849aeef/crates/ruff_linter/src/linter.rs (L491-L493)
## Test Plan
I added two new CLI tests to show that the `per-file-target-version` is
respected in both the formatter and the linter.
## Summary
* Existing example did not include RawSQL() call like it should
* Also clarify the example a bit to make it clearer that the code is not
secure
## Test Plan
N/A, only documentation updated
## Summary
Resolves 3/4 requests in #16217:
- ✅ Remove not special methods: `__cmp__`, `__div__`, `__nonzero__`, and
`__unicode__`.
- ✅ Add special methods: `__next__`, `__buffer__`, `__class_getitem__`,
`__mro_entries__`, `__release_buffer__`, and `__subclasshook__`.
- ✅ Support positional-only arguments.
- ❌ Add support for module functions `__dir__` and `__getattr__`. As
mentioned in the issue the check is scoped for methods rather than
module functions. I am hesitant to expand the scope of this check
without a discussion.
## Test Plan
- Manually confirmed each example file from the issue functioned as
expected.
- Ran cargo nextest to ensure `unexpected_special_method_signature` test
still passed.
Fixes#16217.
## Summary
This is part of the preparation for detecting syntax errors in the
parser from https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/pull/16090/. As suggested
in [this
comment](https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/pull/16090/#discussion_r1953084509),
I started working on a `ParseOptions` struct that could be stored in the
parser. For this initial refactor, I only made it hold the existing
`Mode` option, but for syntax errors, we will also need it to have a
`PythonVersion`. For that use case, I'm picturing something like a
`ParseOptions::with_python_version` method, so you can extend the
current calls to something like
```rust
ParseOptions::from(mode).with_python_version(settings.target_version)
```
But I thought it was worth adding `ParseOptions` alone without changing
any other behavior first.
Most of the diff is just updating call sites taking `Mode` to take
`ParseOptions::from(Mode)` or those taking `PySourceType`s to take
`ParseOptions::from(PySourceType)`. The interesting changes are in the
new `parser/options.rs` file and smaller parts of `parser/mod.rs` and
`ruff_python_parser/src/lib.rs`.
## Test Plan
Existing tests, this should not change any behavior.
## Summary
Move class attribute (property, methods, variables) related cases in
AIR302_names to AIR302_class_attribute
## Test Plan
No functionality change. Test fixture is reogranized
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
This PR updates the formatter and linter to use the `PythonVersion`
struct from the `ruff_python_ast` crate internally. While this doesn't
remove the need for the `linter::PythonVersion` enum, it does remove the
`formatter::PythonVersion` enum and limits the use in the linter to
deserializing from CLI arguments and config files and moves most of the
remaining methods to the `ast::PythonVersion` struct.
## Test Plan
Existing tests, with some inputs and outputs updated to reflect the new
(de)serialization format. I think these are test-specific and shouldn't
affect any external (de)serialization.
---------
Co-authored-by: Alex Waygood <Alex.Waygood@Gmail.com>
## Summary
Separate ImportPathMoved and ProviderName to avoid misusing (AIR303)
## Test Plan
only code arrangement is updated. existing test fixture should be not be
changed
## Summary
This PR makes the following changes:
- It adjusts various callsites to use the new
`ast::StringLiteral::contents_range()` method that was introduced in
https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/pull/16183. This is less verbose and
more type-safe than using the `ast::str::raw_contents()` helper
function.
- It adds a new `ast::ExprStringLiteral::as_unconcatenated_literal()`
helper method, and adjusts various callsites to use it. This addresses
@MichaReiser's review comment at
https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/pull/16183#discussion_r1957334365.
There is no functional change here, but it helps readability to make it
clearer that we're differentiating between implicitly concatenated
strings and unconcatenated strings at various points.
- It renames the `StringLiteralValue::flags()` method to
`StringLiteralFlags::first_literal_flags()`. If you're dealing with an
implicitly concatenated string `string_node`,
`string_node.value.flags().closer_len()` could give an incorrect result;
this renaming makes it clearer that the `StringLiteralFlags` instance
returned by the method is only guaranteed to give accurate information
for the first `StringLiteral` contained in the `ExprStringLiteral` node.
- It deletes the unused `BytesLiteralValue::flags()` method. This seems
prone to misuse in the same way as `StringLiteralValue::flags()`: if
it's an implicitly concatenated bytestring, the `BytesLiteralFlags`
instance returned by the method would only give accurate information for
the first `BytesLiteral` in the bytestring.
## Test Plan
`cargo test`
On `main` we warn the user if there is an invalid noqa comment[^1] and
at least one of the following holds:
- There is at least one diagnostic
- A lint rule related to `noqa`s is enabled (e.g. `RUF100`)
This is probably strange behavior from the point of view of the user, so
we now show invalid `noqa`s even when there are no diagnostics.
Closes#12831
[^1]: For the current definition of "invalid noqa comment", which may be
expanded in #12811 . This PR is independent of loc. cit. in the sense
that the CLI warnings should be consistent, regardless of which `noqa`
comments are considered invalid.
