## Summary
Adds a JSON schema generation step for Red Knot. This PR doesn't yet add
a publishing step because it's still a bit early for that
## Test plan
I tested the schema in Zed, VS Code and PyCharm:
* PyCharm: You have to manually add a schema mapping (settings JSON
Schema Mappings)
* Zed and VS code support the inline schema specification
```toml
#:schema /Users/micha/astral/ruff/knot.schema.json
[environment]
extra-paths = []
[rules]
call-possibly-unbound-method = "error"
unknown-rule = "error"
# duplicate-base = "error"
```
```json
{
"$schema": "file:///Users/micha/astral/ruff/knot.schema.json",
"environment": {
"python-version": "3.13",
"python-platform": "linux2"
},
"rules": {
"unknown-rule": "error"
}
}
```
https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/a18fcd96-7cbe-4110-985b-9f1935584411
The Schema overall works but all editors have their own quirks:
* PyCharm: Hovering a name always shows the section description instead
of the description of the specific setting. But it's the same for other
settings in `pyproject.toml` files 🤷
* VS Code (JSON): Using the generated schema in a JSON file gives
exactly the experience I want
* VS Code (TOML):
* Properties with multiple possible values are repeated during
auto-completion without giving any hint how they're different. 
* The property description mushes together the description of the
property and the value, which looks sort of ridiculous. 
* Autocompletion and documentation hovering works (except the
limitations mentioned above)
* Zed:
* Very similar to VS Code with the exception that it uses the
description attribute to distinguish settings with multiple possible
values 
I don't think there's much we can do here other than hope (or help)
editors improve their auto completion. The same short comings also apply
to ruff, so this isn't something new. For now, I think this is good
enough
## Summary
Long ago, we had a single `ruff` crate. We started to break that up, and
at some point, we wanted to separate the CLI from the core library. So
we created `ruff_cli`, which created a `ruff` binary. Later, the `ruff`
crate was renamed to `ruff_linter` and further broken up into additional
crates.
(This is all from memory -- I didn't bother to look through the history
to ensure that this is 100% correct :))
Now that `ruff` no longer exists, this PR renames `ruff_cli` to `ruff`.
The primary benefit is that the binary target and the crate name are now
the same, which helps with downstream tooling like `cargo-dist`, and
also removes some complexity from the crate and `Cargo.toml` itself.
## Test Plan
- Ran `rm -rf target/release`.
- Ran `cargo build --release`.
- Verified that `./target/release/ruff` was created.
## Summary
Ensures that we only show supported options:
<img width="1228" alt="Screen Shot 2023-08-28 at 11 03 16 AM"
src="50fb7595-dc30-43d2-a7e4-c0103acc15b9">
For now, I'm not super focused on DRYing up the CLI.
## Summary
This extends the `ruff_dev` formatter script util. Instead of only doing
stability checks, you can now choose different compatible options on the
CLI and get statistics.
* It adds an option the formats all files that ruff would check to allow
looking at an entire black-formatted repository with `git diff`
* It computes the [Jaccard
index](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jaccard_index) as a measure of
deviation between input and output, which is useful as single number
metric for assessing our current deviations from black.
* It adds progress bars to both the single projects as well as the
multi-project mode.
* It adds an option to write the multi-project output to a file
Sample usage:
```
$ cargo run --bin ruff_dev -- format-dev --stability-check crates/ruff/resources/test/cpython
$ cargo run --bin ruff_dev -- format-dev --stability-check /home/konsti/projects/django
Syntax error in /home/konsti/projects/django/tests/test_runner_apps/tagged/tests_syntax_error.py: source contains syntax errors (parser error): BaseError { error: UnrecognizedToken(Name { name: "syntax_error" }, None), offset: 131, source_path: "<filename>" }
Found 0 stability errors in 2755 files (jaccard index 0.911) in 9.75s
$ cargo run --bin ruff_dev -- format-dev --write /home/konsti/projects/django
```
Options:
```
Several utils related to the formatter which can be run on one or more repositories. The selected set of files in a repository is the same as for `ruff check`.
* Check formatter stability: Format a repository twice and ensure that it looks that the first and second formatting look the same. * Format: Format the files in a repository to be able to check them with `git diff` * Statistics: The subcommand the Jaccard index between the (assumed to be black formatted) input and the ruff formatted output
Usage: ruff_dev format-dev [OPTIONS] [FILES]...
Arguments:
[FILES]...
Like `ruff check`'s files. See `--multi-project` if you want to format an ecosystem checkout
Options:
--stability-check
Check stability
We want to ensure that once formatted content stays the same when formatted again, which is known as formatter stability or formatter idempotency, and that the formatter prints syntactically valid code. As our test cases cover only a limited amount of code, this allows checking entire repositories.
--write
Format the files. Without this flag, the python files are not modified
--format <FORMAT>
Control the verbosity of the output
[default: default]
Possible values:
- minimal: Filenames only
- default: Filenames and reduced diff
- full: Full diff and invalid code
-x, --exit-first-error
Print only the first error and exit, `-x` is same as pytest
--multi-project
Checks each project inside a directory, useful e.g. if you want to check all of the ecosystem checkouts
--error-file <ERROR_FILE>
Write all errors to this file in addition to stdout. Only used in multi-project mode
```
## Test Plan
I ran this on django (2755 files, jaccard index 0.911) and discovered a
magic trailing comma problem and that we really needed to implement
import formatting. I ran the script on cpython to identify
https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/pull/5558.
ruff_dev repeat recently broke (i think with the cargo update?):
> thread 'main' panicked at 'Command repeat: Short option names must be
unique for each argument, but '-n' is in use by both 'no_cache' and
'repeat''
This fixes this by removing the short argument.
## Summary
We want to ensure that once formatted content stays the same when
formatted again, which is known as formatter stability or formatter
idempotency, and that the formatter prints syntactically valid code. As
our test cases cover only a limited amount of code, this allows checking
entire repositories.
This adds a new subcommand to `ruff_dev` which can be invoked as `cargo
run --bin ruff_dev -- check-formatter-stability <repo>`. While initially
only intended to check stability, it has also found cases where the
formatter printed invalid syntax or panicked.
## Test Plan
Running this on cpython is already identifying bugs
(https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/pull/5089)
## Summary
This adds a new subcommand that can be used as
```shell
cargo build --bin ruff_dev --profile=release-debug
perf record -g -F 999 target/release-debug/ruff_dev repeat --repeat 30 --exit-zero --no-cache path/to/cpython > /dev/null
flamegraph --perfdata perf.data
```
## Test Plan
This is a ruff internal script. I successfully used it to profile
cpython with the instructions above
```console
❯ cargo run rule B017
Finished dev [unoptimized + debuginfo] target(s) in 0.13s
Running `target/debug/ruff rule B017`
no-assert-raises-exception
Code: B017 (flake8-bugbear)
### What it does
Checks for `self.assertRaises(Exception)`.
## Why is this bad?
`assertRaises(Exception)` can lead to your test passing even if the
code being tested is never executed due to a typo.
Either assert for a more specific exception (builtin or custom), use
`assertRaisesRegex` or the context manager form of `assertRaises`.
```
