## Summary
This PR adds support for help end escape command in the lexer.
### What are "help end escape commands"?
First, the escape commands are special IPython syntax which enhances the
functionality for the IPython REPL. There are 9 types of escape kinds
which are recognized by the tokens which are present at the start of the
command (`?`, `??`, `!`, `!!`, etc.).
Here, the help command is using either the `?` or `??` token at the
start (`?str.replace` for example). Those 2 tokens are also supported
when they're at the end of the command (`str.replace?`), but the other
tokens aren't supported in that position.
There are mainly two types of help end escape commands:
1. Ending with either `?` or `??`, but it also starts with one of the
escape tokens (`%matplotlib?`)
2. On the other hand, there's a stricter version for (1) which doesn't
start with any escape tokens (`str.replace?`)
This PR adds support for (1) while (2) will be supported in the parser.
### Priority
Now, if the command starts and ends with an escape token, how do we
decide the kind of this command? This is where priority comes into
picture. This is simple as there's only one priority where `?`/`??` at
the end takes priority over any other escape token and all of the other
tokens are at the same priority. Remember that only `?`/`??` at the end
is considered valid.
This is mainly useful in the case where someone would want to invoke the
help command on the magic command itself. For example, in `%matplotlib?`
the help command takes priority which means that we want help for the
`matplotlib` magic function instead of calling the magic function
itself.
### Specification
Here's where things get a bit tricky. What if there are question mark
tokens at both ends. How do we decide if it's `Help` (`?`) kind or
`Help2` (`??`) kind?
| | Magic | Value | Kind |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| 1 | `?foo?` | `foo` | `Help` |
| 2 | `??foo?` | `foo` | `Help` |
| 3 | `?foo??` | `foo` | `Help2` |
| 4 | `??foo??` | `foo` | `Help2` |
| 5 | `???foo??` | `foo` | `Help2` |
| 6 | `??foo???` | `foo???` | `Help2` |
| 7 | `???foo???` | `?foo???` | `Help2` |
Looking at the above table:
- The question mark tokens on the right takes priority over the ones on
the left but only if the number of question mark on the right is 1 or 2.
- If there are more than 2 question mark tokens on the right side, then
the left side is used to determine the same.
- If the right side is used to determine the kind, then all of the
question marks and whitespaces on the left side are ignored in the
`value`, but if it’s the other way around, then all of the extra
question marks are part of the `value`.
### References
- IPython implementation using the regex:
292e3a2345/IPython/core/inputtransformer2.py (L454-L462)
- Priorities:
292e3a2345/IPython/core/inputtransformer2.py (L466-L469)
## Test Plan
Add a bunch of test cases for the lexer and verify that it matches the
behavior of
IPython transformer.
resolves: #6357
## Summary
Historically, we've stored "qualified names" on our
`BindingKind::Import`, `BindingKind::SubmoduleImport`, and
`BindingKind::ImportFrom` structs. In Ruff, a "qualified name" is a
dot-separated path to a symbol. For example, given `import foo.bar`, the
"qualified name" would be `"foo.bar"`; and given `from foo.bar import
baz`, the "qualified name" would be `foo.bar.baz`.
This PR modifies the `BindingKind` structs to instead store _call paths_
rather than qualified names. So in the examples above, we'd store
`["foo", "bar"]` and `["foo", "bar", "baz"]`. It turns out that this
more efficient given our data access patterns. Namely, we frequently
need to convert the qualified name to a call path (whenever we call
`resolve_call_path`), and it turns out that we do this operation enough
that those conversations show up on benchmarks.
There are a few other advantages to using call paths, rather than
qualified names:
1. The size of `BindingKind` is reduced from 32 to 24 bytes, since we no
longer need to store a `String` (only a boxed slice).
2. All three import types are more consistent, since they now all store
a boxed slice, rather than some storing an `&str` and some storing a
`String` (for `BindingKind::ImportFrom`, we needed to allocate a
`String` to create the qualified name, but the call path is a slice of
static elements that don't require that allocation).
3. A lot of code gets simpler, in part because we now do call path
resolution "earlier". Most notably, for relative imports (`from .foo
import bar`), we store the _resolved_ call path rather than the relative
call path, so the semantic model doesn't have to deal with that
resolution. (See that `resolve_call_path` is simpler, fewer branches,
etc.)
In my testing, this change improves the all-rules benchmark by another
4-5% on top of the improvements mentioned in #6047.
## Summary
Update `F841` autofix to not remove line magic expr
## Test Plan
Added test case for assignment statement with and without type
annotation
fixes: #6116
**Summary** This adds the information whether we're in a .py python
source file or in a .pyi stub file to enable people working on #5822 and
related issues.
I'm not completely happy with `Default` for something that depends on
the input.
**Test Plan** None, this is currently unused, i'm leaving this to first
implementation of stub file specific formatting.
---------
Co-authored-by: Micha Reiser <micha@reiser.io>
Part of #5062
Closes https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/issues/5931
Implements formatting of a sequence of type parameters in a dedicated
struct for reuse by classes, functions, and type aliases (preparing for
#5929). Adds formatting of type parameters in class and function
definitions — previously, they were just elided.
## Summary
Similar to #6279, moving some helpers onto the struct in the name of
reducing the number of random undiscoverable utilities we have in
`helpers.rs`.
Most of the churn is migrating rules to take `ast::ExprCall` instead of
the spread call arguments.
## Test Plan
`cargo test`
## Summary
This PR removes a now-unnecessary abstraction from `helper.rs`
(`CallArguments`), in favor of adding methods to `Arguments` directly,
which helps with discoverability.
## Summary
This PR boxes the `TypeParams` and `Arguments` fields on the class
definition node. These fields are optional and often emitted, and given
that class definition is our largest enum variant, we pay the cost of
including them for every statement in the AST. Boxing these types
reduces the statement size by 40 bytes, which seems like a good tradeoff
given how infrequently these are accessed.
## Test Plan
Need to benchmark, but no behavior changes.
## Summary
This PR leverages the `Arguments` AST node introduced in #6259 in the
formatter, which ensures that we correctly handle trailing comments in
calls, like:
```python
f(
1,
# comment
)
pass
```
(Previously, this was treated as a leading comment on `pass`.)
This also allows us to unify the argument handling across calls and
class definitions.
## Test Plan
A bunch of new fixture tests, plus improved Black compatibility.
## Summary
Similar to #6259, this PR adds a `TypeParams` node to the AST, to
capture the list of type parameters with their surrounding brackets.
If a statement lacks type parameters, the `type_params` field will be
`None`.
## Summary
This PR adds a new `Arguments` AST node, which we can use for function
calls and class definitions.
The `Arguments` node spans from the left (open) to right (close)
parentheses inclusive.
In the case of classes, the `Arguments` is an option, to differentiate
between:
```python
# None
class C: ...
# Some, with empty vectors
class C(): ...
```
In this PR, we don't really leverage this change (except that a few
rules get much simpler, since we don't need to lex to find the start and
end ranges of the parentheses, e.g.,
`crates/ruff/src/rules/pyupgrade/rules/lru_cache_without_parameters.rs`,
`crates/ruff/src/rules/pyupgrade/rules/unnecessary_class_parentheses.rs`).
In future PRs, this will be especially helpful for the formatter, since
we can track comments enclosed on the node itself.
## Test Plan
`cargo test`
## Summary
This PR renames...
- `Parameter#arg` to `Parameter#name`
- `ParameterWithDefault#def` to `ParameterWithDefault#parameter` (such
that `ParameterWithDefault` has a `default` and a `parameter`)
## Test Plan
`cargo test`
## Summary
This PR renames a few AST nodes for clarity:
- `Arguments` is now `Parameters`
- `Arg` is now `Parameter`
- `ArgWithDefault` is now `ParameterWithDefault`
For now, the attribute names that reference `Parameters` directly are
changed (e.g., on `StmtFunctionDef`), but the attributes on `Parameters`
itself are not (e.g., `vararg`). We may revisit that decision in the
future.
For context, the AST node formerly known as `Arguments` is used in
function definitions. Formally (outside of the Python context),
"arguments" typically refers to "the values passed to a function", while
"parameters" typically refers to "the variables used in a function
definition". E.g., if you Google "arguments vs parameters", you'll get
some explanation like:
> A parameter is a variable in a function definition. It is a
placeholder and hence does not have a concrete value. An argument is a
value passed during function invocation.
We're thus deviating from Python's nomenclature in favor of a scheme
that we find to be more precise.
<!--
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
This PR removes the `Interactive` and `FunctionType` parser modes that are unused by ruff
<!-- What's the purpose of the change? What does it do, and why? -->
## Test Plan
`cargo test`
<!-- 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
This PR removes the `type_comment` field which our parser doesn't support.
<!-- What's the purpose of the change? What does it do, and why? -->
## Test Plan
`cargo test`
<!-- 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
This PR removes the type ignore node from the AST because our parser doesn't support it, and just having it around is confusing.
<!-- What's the purpose of the change? What does it do, and why? -->
## Test Plan
`cargo build`
<!-- How was it tested? -->
## Summary
This PR protects against code like:
```python
from typing import Optional
import bar # ruff: noqa
import baz
class Foo:
x: Optional[str] = None
```
In which the user wrote `# ruff: noqa` to ignore a specific error, not
realizing that it was a file-level exemption that thus turned off all
lint rules.
Specifically, if a `# ruff: noqa` directive is not at the start of a
line, we now ignore it and warn, since this is almost certainly a
mistake.
## Summary
This is a rewrite of the main comment placement logic. `place_comment`
now has three parts:
- place own line comments
- between branches
- after a branch
- place end-of-line comments
- after colon
- after a branch
- place comments for specific nodes (that include module level comments)
The rewrite fixed three bugs: `class A: # trailing comment` comments now
stay end-of-line, `try: # comment` remains end-of-line and deeply
indented try-else-finally comments remain with the right nested
statement.
It will be much easier to give more alternative branches nodes since
this is abstracted away by `is_node_with_body` and the first/last child
helpers. Adding new node types can now be done by adding an entry to the
`place_comment` match. The code went from 1526 lines before #6033 to
1213 lines now.
It thinks it easier to just read the new `placement.rs` rather than
reviewing the diff.
## Test Plan
The existing fixtures staying the same or improving plus new ones for
the bug fixes.
## Summary
This PR adds the implementation for the new Jupyter AST nodes i.e.,
`ExprLineMagic` and `StmtLineMagic`.
## Test Plan
Add test cases for `unparse` containing magic commands
resolves: #6087
<!--
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? -->
Part of #5062
Requires https://github.com/astral-sh/RustPython-Parser/pull/32
Adds visitation of type alias statements and type parameters in class
and function definitions.
Duplicates tests for `PreorderVisitor` into `Visitor` with new
snapshots. Testing required node implementations for the `TypeParam`
enum, which is a chunk of the diff and the reason we need `Ranged`
implementations in
https://github.com/astral-sh/RustPython-Parser/pull/32.
## Test Plan
<!-- How was it tested? -->
Adds unit tests with snapshots.
## Summary
This PR is a refactoring of placement.rs. The code got more consistent,
some comments were updated and some dead code was removed or replaced
with debug assertions. It also contains a bugfix for the placement of
end-of-branch comments with nested bodies inside try statements that
occurred when refactoring the nested body loop.
## Test Plan
The existing test cases don't change. I added a couple of cases that i
think should be tested but weren't, and a regression test for the bugfix
## Summary
My intuition is that it's faster to do these checks as-needed rather
than allocation new hash maps and vectors for the arguments. (We
typically only query once anyway.)
## Summary
This PR moves two rules (`invalid-all-format` and `invalid-all-object`)
out of the name-binding phase, and into the dedicated pass over all
bindings that occurs at the end of the `Checker`. This is part of my
continued quest to separate the semantic model-building logic from the
actual rule enforcement.
## Summary
This crate now contains utilities for dealing with trivia more broadly:
whitespace, newlines, "simple" trivia lexing, etc. So renaming it to
reflect its increased responsibilities.
To avoid conflicts, I've also renamed `Token` and `TokenKind` to
`SimpleToken` and `SimpleTokenKind`.
## Summary
The `SemanticModel` currently stores the "body" of a given `Suite`,
along with the current statement index. This is used to support "next
sibling" queries, but we only use this in exactly one place -- the rule
that simplifies constructs like this to `any` or `all`:
```python
for x in y:
if x == 0:
return True
return False
```
Instead of tracking the state, we can just do a (slightly more
expensive) traversal, by finding the node within its parent and
returning the next node in the body.
Note that we'll only have to do this extremely rarely -- namely, for
functions that contain something like:
```python
for x in y:
if x == 0:
return True
```
## Summary
This PR just naively unrolls `collect_call_path` to handle attribute
resolutions of up to eight segments. In profiling via Instruments, it
seems to be about 4x faster for a very hot code path (4% of total
execution time on `main`, 1% here).
Profiling by running `RAYON_NUM_THREADS=1 cargo instruments -t time
--profile release-debug --time-limit 10000 -p ruff_cli -o
FromSlice.trace -- check crates/ruff/resources/test/cpython --silent -e
--no-cache --select ALL`, and modifying the linter to loop infinitely up
to the specified time (10 seconds) to increase sample size.
Before:
<img width="1792" alt="Screen Shot 2023-07-15 at 5 13 34 PM"
src="4a8b0b45-8b67-43e9-af5e-65b326928a8e">
After:
<img width="1792" alt="Screen Shot 2023-07-15 at 8 38 51 PM"
src="d8829159-2c79-4a49-ab3c-9e4e86f5b2b1">
## Summary
Previously, `StmtIf` was defined recursively as
```rust
pub struct StmtIf {
pub range: TextRange,
pub test: Box<Expr>,
pub body: Vec<Stmt>,
pub orelse: Vec<Stmt>,
}
```
Every `elif` was represented as an `orelse` with a single `StmtIf`. This
means that this representation couldn't differentiate between
```python
if cond1:
x = 1
else:
if cond2:
x = 2
```
and
```python
if cond1:
x = 1
elif cond2:
x = 2
```
It also makes many checks harder than they need to be because we have to
recurse just to iterate over an entire if-elif-else and because we're
lacking nodes and ranges on the `elif` and `else` branches.
We change the representation to a flat
```rust
pub struct StmtIf {
pub range: TextRange,
pub test: Box<Expr>,
pub body: Vec<Stmt>,
pub elif_else_clauses: Vec<ElifElseClause>,
}
pub struct ElifElseClause {
pub range: TextRange,
pub test: Option<Expr>,
pub body: Vec<Stmt>,
}
```
where `test: Some(_)` represents an `elif` and `test: None` an else.
This representation is different tradeoff, e.g. we need to allocate the
`Vec<ElifElseClause>`, the `elif`s are now different than the `if`s
(which matters in rules where want to check both `if`s and `elif`s) and
the type system doesn't guarantee that the `test: None` else is actually
last. We're also now a bit more inconsistent since all other `else`,
those from `for`, `while` and `try`, still don't have nodes. With the
new representation some things became easier, e.g. finding the `elif`
token (we can use the start of the `ElifElseClause`) and formatting
comments for if-elif-else (no more dangling comments splitting, we only
have to insert the dangling comment after the colon manually and set
`leading_alternate_branch_comments`, everything else is taken of by
having nodes for each branch and the usual placement.rs fixups).
## Merge Plan
This PR requires coordination between the parser repo and the main ruff
repo. I've split the ruff part, into two stacked PRs which have to be
merged together (only the second one fixes all tests), the first for the
formatter to be reviewed by @michareiser and the second for the linter
to be reviewed by @charliermarsh.
* MH: Review and merge
https://github.com/astral-sh/RustPython-Parser/pull/20
* MH: Review and merge or move later in stack
https://github.com/astral-sh/RustPython-Parser/pull/21
* MH: Review and approve
https://github.com/astral-sh/RustPython-Parser/pull/22
* MH: Review and approve formatter PR
https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/pull/5459
* CM: Review and approve linter PR
https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/pull/5460
* Merge linter PR in formatter PR, fix ecosystem checks (ecosystem
checks can't run on the formatter PR and won't run on the linter PR, so
we need to merge them first)
* Merge https://github.com/astral-sh/RustPython-Parser/pull/22
* Create tag in the parser, update linter+formatter PR
* Merge linter+formatter PR https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/pull/5459
---------
Co-authored-by: Micha Reiser <micha@reiser.io>
## Summary
The motivating change here is to remove `let range =
except_handler.try_identifier().unwrap();` and instead just do
`name.range()`, since exception names now have ranges attached to them
by the parse. This also required some refactors (which are improvements)
to the built-in attribute shadowing rules, since at least one invocation
relied on passing in the exception handler and calling
`.try_identifier()`. Now that we have easy access to identifiers, we can
remove the whole `AnyShadowing` abstraction.
## Summary
I'm doing some unrelated profiling, and I noticed that this method is
actually measurable on the CPython benchmark -- it's > 1% of execution
time. We don't need to lex here, we already know the ranges of all
comments, so we can just do a simple binary search for overlap, which
brings the method down to 0%.
## Test Plan
`cargo test`
## Summary
When required-imports is set with the syntax from ... import ... as ...,
autofix I002 is failing
## Test Plan
Reuse the same python files as
`crates/ruff/src/rules/isort/mod.rs:required_import` test.
