## Summary
This change adds a rule to detect functions declared `async` but lacking
any of `await`, `async with`, or `async for`. This resolves#9951.
## Test Plan
This change was tested by following
https://docs.astral.sh/ruff/contributing/#rule-testing-fixtures-and-snapshots
and adding positive and negative cases for each of `await` vs nothing,
`async with` vs `with`, and `async for` vs `for`.
## Summary
This PR moves the `Q003` rule to AST checker.
This is the final rule that used the docstring detection state machine
and thus this PR removes it as well.
resolves: #7595resolves: #7808
## Test Plan
- [x] `cargo test`
- [x] Make sure there are no changes in the ecosystem
## Summary
Adds more aggressive logic to PLR1730, `if-stmt-min-max`
Closes#10907
## Test Plan
`cargo test`
---------
Co-authored-by: Charlie Marsh <charlie.r.marsh@gmail.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
Hi! 👋
Thanks for sharing ruff as software libre — it helps me keep Python code
quality up with pre-commit, both locally and CI 🙏
While studying the examples at
https://docs.astral.sh/ruff/rules/function-uses-loop-variable/#example I
noticed that the last of the examples had a bug: prior to this fix, `ì`
was passed to the lambda for `x` rather than for `i` — the two are
mixed-up. The reason it's easy to overlook is because addition is an
commutative operation and so `x + i` and `i + x` give the same result
(and least with integers), despite the mix-up. For proof, let me demo
the relevant part with before and after:
```python
In [1]: from functools import partial
In [2]: [partial(lambda x, i: (x, i), i)(123) for i in range(3)]
Out[2]: [(0, 123), (1, 123), (2, 123)]
In [3]: [partial(lambda x, i: (x, i), i=i)(123) for i in range(3)]
Out[3]: [(123, 0), (123, 1), (123, 2)]
```
Does that make sense?
## Test Plan
<!-- How was it tested? -->
Was manually tested using IPython.
CC @r4f @grandchild
## Summary
If `RUF100` was included in a per-file-ignore, we respected it on cases
like `# noqa: F401`, but not the blanket variant (`# noqa`).
Closes https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/issues/10906.
## Summary
Implement new rule: Prefer augmented assignment (#8877). It checks for
the assignment statement with the form of `<expr> = <expr>
<binary-operator> …` with a unsafe fix to use augmented assignment
instead.
## Test Plan
1. Snapshot test is included in the PR.
2. Manually test with playground.
Refs #3172
## Summary
Fix a typo in the docs example, and add a test for the case where a
negative pattern and a positive pattern overlap.
The behavior here is simple: patterns (positive or negative) are always
additive if they hit (i.e. match for a positive pattern, don't match for
a negated pattern). We never "un-ignore" previously-ignored rules based
on a pattern (positive or negative) failing to hit.
It's simple enough that I don't really see other cases we need to add
tests for (the tests we have cover all branches in the ignores_from_path
function that implements the core logic), but open to reviewer feedback.
I also didn't end up changing the docs to explain this more, because I
think they are accurate as written and don't wrongly imply any more
complex behavior. Open to reviewer feedback on this as well!
After some discussion, I think allowing negative patterns to un-ignore
rules is too confusing and easy to get wrong; if we need that, we should
add `per-file-selects` instead.
## Test Plan
Test/docs only change; tests pass, docs render and look right.
---------
Co-authored-by: Alex Waygood <Alex.Waygood@gmail.com>
## Summary
This PR adds the implementation for the current
[flake8-bugbear](https://github.com/PyCQA/flake8-bugbear)'s B038 rule.
The B038 rule checks for mutation of loop iterators in the body of a for
loop and alerts when found.
Rational:
Editing the loop iterator can lead to undesired behavior and is probably
a bug in most cases.
Closes#9511.
Note there will be a second iteration of B038 implemented in
`flake8-bugbear` soon, and this PR currently only implements the weakest
form of the rule.
I'd be happy to also implement the further improvements to B038 here in
ruff 🙂
See https://github.com/PyCQA/flake8-bugbear/issues/454 for more
information on the planned improvements.
## Test Plan
Re-using the same test file that I've used for `flake8-bugbear`, which
is included in this PR (look for the `B038.py` file).
Note: this is my first time using `rust` (beside `rustlings`) - I'd be
very happy about thorough feedback on what I could've done better
🙂 - Bring it on 😀
## Summary
Code cleanup for per-file ignores; use a struct instead of a tuple.
Named the structs for individual ignores and the list of ignores
`CompiledPerFileIgnore` and `CompiledPerFileIgnoreList`. Name choice is
because we already have a `PerFileIgnore` struct for a
pre-compiled-matchers form of the config. Name bikeshedding welcome.
## Test Plan
Refactor, should not change behavior; existing tests pass.
---------
Co-authored-by: Alex Waygood <alex.waygood@gmail.com>
## Summary
I believe this should close
https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/issues/10880? The `.gitignore`
creation seems ok, since it truncates, but using `cachedir::is_tagged`
followed by `cachedir::add_tag` is not safe, as `cachedir::add_tag`
_fails_ if the file already exists.
This also matches the structure of the code in `uv`.
Closes https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/issues/10880.
## 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
Improve `blanket-noqa` error message in cases where codes are provided
but not detected due to formatting issues. Namely `# noqa X100` (missing
colon) or `noqa : X100` (space before colon). The behavior is similar to
`NQA002` and `NQA003` from `flake8-noqa` mentioned in #850. The idea to
merge the rules into `PGH004` was suggested by @MichaReiser
https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/pull/10325#issuecomment-2025535444.
## Test Plan
Test cases added to fixture.
Fixes#3172
## Summary
Allow prefixing [extend-]per-file-ignores patterns with `!` to negate
the pattern; listed rules / prefixes will be ignored in all files that
don't match the pattern.
## Test Plan
Added tests for the feature.
Rendered docs and checked rendered output.
Fixes#5499
## Summary
Add support for `FORCE_COLOR` env var, as specified at
https://force-color.org/
## Test Plan
I wrote an integration test for this, and then realized that can't work,
since we use a dev-dependency on `colored` with the `no-color` feature
to avoid ANSI color codes in test snapshots.
So this is just tested manually.
`cargo run --features test-rules -- check --no-cache --isolated -
--select RUF901 --diff < /dev/null` shows a colored diff.
`cargo run --features test-rules -- check --no-cache --isolated -
--select RUF901 --diff < /dev/null | less` does not have color, since we
pipe it to `less`.
`FORCE_COLOR=1 cargo run --features test-rules -- check --no-cache
--isolated - --select RUF901 --diff < /dev/null | less` does have color
(after this diff), even though we pipe it to `less`.
