Commit graph

72 commits

Author SHA1 Message Date
Brent Westbrook
c2b2e42ad3
[syntax-errors] Invalid syntax in annotations (#17101)
Summary
--

This PR detects the use of invalid syntax in annotation scopes,
including
`yield` and `yield from` expressions and named expressions. I combined a
few
different types of CPython errors here, but I think the resulting error
messages
still make sense and are even preferable to what CPython gives. For
example, we
report `yield expression cannot be used in a type annotation` for both
of these:

```pycon
>>> def f[T](x: (yield 1)): ...
  File "<python-input-26>", line 1
    def f[T](x: (yield 1)): ...
                 ^^^^^^^
SyntaxError: yield expression cannot be used within the definition of a generic
>>> def foo() -> (yield x): ...
  File "<python-input-28>", line 1
    def foo() -> (yield x): ...
                  ^^^^^^^
SyntaxError: 'yield' outside function
```

Fixes https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/issues/11118.

Test Plan
--

New inline tests, along with some updates to existing tests.
2025-04-03 17:56:55 -04:00
Micha Reiser
8a4158c5f8
Upgrade to Rust 1.86 and bump MSRV to 1.84 (#17171)
<!--
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

I decided to disable the new
[`needless_continue`](https://rust-lang.github.io/rust-clippy/master/index.html#needless_continue)
rule because I often found the explicit `continue` more readable over an
empty block or having to invert the condition of an other branch.


## Test Plan

`cargo test`

---------

Co-authored-by: Alex Waygood <Alex.Waygood@Gmail.com>
2025-04-03 15:59:44 +00:00
Brent Westbrook
a0819f0c51
[syntax-errors] Store to or delete __debug__ (#16984)
Summary
--

Detect setting or deleting `__debug__`. Assigning to `__debug__` was a
`SyntaxError` on the earliest version I tested (3.8). Deleting
`__debug__` was made a `SyntaxError` in [BPO 45000], which said it was
resolved in Python 3.10. However, `del __debug__` was also a runtime
error (`NameError`) when I tested in Python 3.9.6, so I thought it was
worth including 3.9 in this check.

I don't think it was ever a *good* idea to try `del __debug__`, so I
think there's also an argument for not making this version-dependent at
all. That would only simplify the implementation very slightly, though.

[BPO 45000]: https://github.com/python/cpython/issues/89163

Test Plan
--

New inline tests. This also required adding a `PythonVersion` field to
the `TestContext` that could be taken from the inline `ParseOptions` and
making the version field on the options accessible.
2025-03-29 12:07:20 -04:00
Brent Westbrook
5697d21fca
[syntax-errors] Irrefutable case pattern before final case (#16905)
Summary
--

Detects irrefutable `match` cases before the final case using a modified
version
of the existing `Pattern::is_irrefutable` method from the AST crate. The
modified method helps to retrieve a more precise diagnostic range to
match what
Python 3.13 shows in the REPL.

Test Plan
--

New inline tests, as well as some updates to existing tests that had
irrefutable
patterns before the last block.
2025-03-26 12:27:16 -04:00
Brent Westbrook
2711e08eb8
[syntax-errors] Fix false positive for parenthesized tuple index (#16948)
Summary
--

Fixes #16943 by checking if the tuple is not parenthesized before
emitting an error.

Test Plan
--

New inline test based on the initial report
2025-03-24 10:34:38 -04:00
Brent Westbrook
e4f5fe8cf7
[syntax-errors] Duplicate type parameter names (#16858)
Some checks are pending
CI / cargo fmt (push) Waiting to run
CI / Determine changes (push) Waiting to run
CI / cargo clippy (push) Blocked by required conditions
CI / cargo test (linux) (push) Blocked by required conditions
CI / cargo test (linux, release) (push) Blocked by required conditions
CI / cargo test (windows) (push) Blocked by required conditions
CI / test scripts (push) Blocked by required conditions
CI / cargo test (wasm) (push) Blocked by required conditions
CI / cargo build (release) (push) Waiting to run
CI / cargo build (msrv) (push) Blocked by required conditions
CI / cargo fuzz build (push) Blocked by required conditions
CI / fuzz parser (push) Blocked by required conditions
CI / ecosystem (push) Blocked by required conditions
CI / cargo shear (push) Blocked by required conditions
CI / python package (push) Waiting to run
CI / pre-commit (push) Waiting to run
CI / mkdocs (push) Waiting to run
CI / formatter instabilities and black similarity (push) Blocked by required conditions
CI / test ruff-lsp (push) Blocked by required conditions
CI / check playground (push) Blocked by required conditions
CI / benchmarks (push) Blocked by required conditions
[Knot Playground] Release / publish (push) Waiting to run
Summary
--

Detects duplicate type parameter names in function definitions, class
definitions, and type alias statements.

I also boxed the `type_params` field on `StmtTypeAlias` to make it
easier to
`match` with functions and classes. (That's the reason for the red-knot
code
owner review requests, sorry!)

Test Plan
--

New `ruff_python_syntax_errors` unit tests.

Fixes #11119.
2025-03-21 15:06:22 -04:00
Junhson Jean-Baptiste
2a4d835132
Use the common OperatorPrecedence for the parser (#16747)
Some checks are pending
CI / Determine changes (push) Waiting to run
CI / cargo fmt (push) Waiting to run
CI / cargo clippy (push) Blocked by required conditions
CI / cargo test (linux) (push) Blocked by required conditions
CI / cargo test (linux, release) (push) Blocked by required conditions
CI / cargo test (windows) (push) Blocked by required conditions
CI / test scripts (push) Blocked by required conditions
CI / cargo test (wasm) (push) Blocked by required conditions
CI / cargo build (release) (push) Waiting to run
CI / cargo build (msrv) (push) Blocked by required conditions
CI / cargo fuzz build (push) Blocked by required conditions
CI / fuzz parser (push) Blocked by required conditions
CI / ecosystem (push) Blocked by required conditions
CI / cargo shear (push) Blocked by required conditions
CI / python package (push) Waiting to run
CI / pre-commit (push) Waiting to run
CI / mkdocs (push) Waiting to run
CI / formatter instabilities and black similarity (push) Blocked by required conditions
CI / test ruff-lsp (push) Blocked by required conditions
CI / check playground (push) Blocked by required conditions
CI / benchmarks (push) Blocked by required conditions
[Knot Playground] Release / publish (push) Waiting to run
## Summary

This change continues to resolve #16071 (and continues the work started
in #16162). Specifically, this PR changes the code in the parser so that
it uses the `OperatorPrecedence` struct from `ruff_python_ast` instead
of its own version. This is part of an effort to get rid of the
redundant definitions of `OperatorPrecedence` throughout the codebase.

Note that this PR only makes this change for `ruff_python_parser` -- we
still want to make a similar change for the formatter (namely the
`OperatorPrecedence` defined in the expression part of the formatter,
the pattern one is different). I separated the work to keep the PRs
small and easily reviewable.

## Test Plan

Because this is an internal change, I didn't add any additional tests.
Existing tests do pass.
2025-03-21 09:40:37 +05:30
Brent Westbrook
42cbce538b
[syntax-errors] Fix star annotation before Python 3.11 (#16878)
Summary
--

Fixes #16874. I previously emitted a syntax error when starred
annotations were _allowed_ rather than when they were actually used.
This caused false positives for any starred parameter name because these
are allowed to have starred annotations but not required to. The fix is
to check if the annotation is actually starred after parsing it.

Test Plan
--

New inline parser tests derived from the initial report and more
examples from the comments, although I think the first case should cover
them all.
2025-03-20 17:44:52 -04:00
Brent Westbrook
dcf31c9348
[syntax-errors] PEP 701 f-strings before Python 3.12 (#16543)
## Summary

This PR detects the use of PEP 701 f-strings before 3.12. This one
sounded difficult and ended up being pretty easy, so I think there's a
good chance I've over-simplified things. However, from experimenting in
the Python REPL and checking with [pyright], I think this is correct.
pyright actually doesn't even flag the comment case, but Python does.

I also checked pyright's implementation for
[quotes](98dc4469cc/packages/pyright-internal/src/analyzer/checker.ts (L1379-L1398))
and
[escapes](98dc4469cc/packages/pyright-internal/src/analyzer/checker.ts (L1365-L1377))
and think I've approximated how they do it.

Python's error messages also point to the simple approach of these
characters simply not being allowed:

```pycon
Python 3.11.11 (main, Feb 12 2025, 14:51:05) [Clang 19.1.6 ] on linux
Type "help", "copyright", "credits" or "license" for more information.
>>> f'''multiline {
... expression # comment
... }'''
  File "<stdin>", line 3
    }'''
        ^
SyntaxError: f-string expression part cannot include '#'
>>> f'''{not a line \
... continuation}'''
  File "<stdin>", line 2
    continuation}'''
                    ^
SyntaxError: f-string expression part cannot include a backslash
>>> f'hello {'world'}'
  File "<stdin>", line 1
    f'hello {'world'}'
              ^^^^^
SyntaxError: f-string: expecting '}'
```

And since escapes aren't allowed, I don't think there are any tricky
cases where nested quotes or comments can sneak in.

It's also slightly annoying that the error is repeated for every nested
quote character, but that also mirrors pyright, although they highlight
the whole nested string, which is a little nicer. However, their check
is in the analysis phase, so I don't think we have such easy access to
the quoted range, at least without adding another mini visitor.

## Test Plan

New inline tests

[pyright]:
https://pyright-play.net/?pythonVersion=3.11&strict=true&code=EYQw5gBAvBAmCWBjALgCgO4gHaygRgEoAoEaCAIgBpyiiBiCLAUwGdknYIBHAVwHt2LIgDMA5AFlwSCJhwAuCAG8IoMAG1Rs2KIC6EAL6iIxosbPmLlq5foRWiEAAcmERAAsQAJxAomnltY2wuSKogA6WKIAdABWfPBYqCAE%2BuSBVqbpWVm2iHwAtvlMWMgB2ekiolUAgq4FjgA2TAAeEMieSADWCsoV5qoaqrrGDJ5MiDz%2B8ABuLqosAIREhlXlaybrmyYMXsDw7V4AnoysyAmQ5SIhwYo3d9cheADUeKlv5O%2BpQA
2025-03-18 11:12:15 -04:00
Brent Westbrook
75a562d313
[syntax-errors] Parenthesized context managers before Python 3.9 (#16523)
Summary
--

I thought this was very complicated based on the comment here:
https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/pull/16106#issuecomment-2653505671 and
on some of the discussion in the CPython issue here:
https://github.com/python/cpython/issues/56991. However, after a little
bit of experimentation, I think it boils down to this example:

```python
with (x as y): ...
```

The issue is parentheses around a `with` item with an `optional_var`, as
we (and
[Python](https://docs.python.org/3/library/ast.html#ast.withitem)) call
the trailing variable name (`y` in this case). It's not actually about
line breaks after all, except that line breaks are allowed in
parenthesized expressions, which explains the validity of cases like


```pycon
>>> with (
...     x,
...     y
... ) as foo:
...     pass
... 
```

even on Python 3.8.

I followed [pyright]'s example again here on the diagnostic range (just
the opening paren) and the wording of the error.


Test Plan
--
Inline tests

[pyright]:
https://pyright-play.net/?pythonVersion=3.7&strict=true&code=FAdwlgLgFgBAFAewA4FMB2cBEAzBCB0EAHhJgJQwCGAzjLgmQFwz6tA
2025-03-17 08:54:55 -04:00
Alex Waygood
38bfda94ce
[syntax-errors] Improve error message and range for pre-PEP-614 decorator syntax errors (#16581)
## Summary

A small followup to https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/pull/16386. We now
tell the user exactly what it was about their decorator that constituted
invalid syntax on Python <3.9, and the range now highlights the specific
sub-expression that is invalid rather than highlighting the whole
decorator

## Test Plan

Inline snapshots are updated, and new ones are added.
2025-03-17 11:17:27 +00:00
Brent Westbrook
3a32e56445
[syntax-errors] Unparenthesized assignment expressions in sets and indexes (#16404)
## Summary
This PR detects unparenthesized assignment expressions used in set
literals and comprehensions and in sequence indexes. The link to the
release notes in https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/issues/6591 just has
this entry:
> * Assignment expressions can now be used unparenthesized within set
literals and set comprehensions, as well as in sequence indexes (but not
slices).

with no other information, so hopefully the test cases I came up with
cover all of the changes. I also tested these out in the Python REPL and
they actually worked in Python 3.9 too. I'm guessing this may be another
case that was "formally made part of the language spec in Python 3.10,
but usable -- and commonly used -- in Python >=3.9" as @AlexWaygood
added to the body of #6591 for context managers. So we may want to
change the version cutoff, but I've gone along with the release notes
for now.

## Test Plan

New inline parser tests and linter CLI tests.
2025-03-14 15:06:42 -04:00
Brent Westbrook
6311412373
[syntax-errors] Star annotations before Python 3.11 (#16545)
Summary
--

This is closely related to (and stacked on)
https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/pull/16544 and detects star
annotations in function definitions.

I initially called the variant `StarExpressionInAnnotation` to mirror
`StarExpressionInIndex`, but I realized it's not really a "star
expression" in this position and renamed it. `StarAnnotation` seems in
line with the PEP.

Test Plan
--

Two new inline tests. It looked like there was pretty good existing
coverage of this syntax, so I just added simple examples to test the
version cutoff.
2025-03-14 15:20:44 +00:00
Brent Westbrook
4f2851982d
[syntax-errors] Star expression in index before Python 3.11 (#16544)
Summary
--

This PR detects tuple unpacking expressions in index/subscript
expressions before Python 3.11.

Test Plan
--

New inline tests
2025-03-14 14:51:34 +00:00
Brent Westbrook
2382fe1f25
[syntax-errors] Tuple unpacking in for statement iterator clause before Python 3.9 (#16558)
Summary
--

This PR reuses a slightly modified version of the
`check_tuple_unpacking` method added for detecting unpacking in `return`
and `yield` statements to detect the same issue in the iterator clause
of `for` loops.

I ran into the same issue with a bare `for x in *rest: ...` example
(invalid even on Python 3.13) and added it as a comment on
https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/issues/16520.

I considered just making this an additional `StarTupleKind` variant as
well, but this change was in a different version of Python, so I kept it
separate.

Test Plan
--

New inline tests.
2025-03-13 15:55:17 -04:00
Brent Westbrook
b3c884f4f3
[syntax-errors] Parenthesized keyword argument names after Python 3.8 (#16482)
Summary
--

Unlike the other syntax errors detected so far, parenthesized keyword
arguments are only allowed *before* 3.8. It sounds like they were only
accidentally allowed before that [^1].

As an aside, you get a pretty confusing error from Python for this, so
it's nice that we can catch it:

```pycon
>>> def f(**kwargs): ...
... f((a)=1)
...
  File "<python-input-0>", line 2
    f((a)=1)
       ^^^
SyntaxError: expression cannot contain assignment, perhaps you meant "=="?
>>>
```
Test Plan
--
Inline tests.

[^1]: https://github.com/python/cpython/issues/78822
2025-03-06 12:18:13 -05:00
Brent Westbrook
6c14225c66
[syntax-errors] Tuple unpacking in return and yield before Python 3.8 (#16485)
Summary
--

Checks for tuple unpacking in `return` and `yield` statements before
Python 3.8, as described [here].

Test Plan
--
Inline tests.

[here]: https://github.com/python/cpython/issues/76298
2025-03-06 11:57:20 -05:00
Brent Westbrook
318f503714
[syntax-errors] Named expressions in decorators before Python 3.9 (#16386)
Summary
--

This PR detects the relaxed grammar for decorators proposed in [PEP
614](https://peps.python.org/pep-0614/) on Python 3.8 and lower.

The 3.8 grammar for decorators is
[here](https://docs.python.org/3.8/reference/compound_stmts.html#grammar-token-decorators):

```
decorators                ::=  decorator+
decorator                 ::=  "@" dotted_name ["(" [argument_list [","]] ")"] NEWLINE
dotted_name               ::=  identifier ("." identifier)*
```

in contrast to the current grammar
[here](https://docs.python.org/3/reference/compound_stmts.html#grammar-token-python-grammar-decorators)

```
decorators                ::= decorator+
decorator                 ::= "@" assignment_expression NEWLINE
assignment_expression ::= [identifier ":="] expression
```

Test Plan
--

New inline parser tests.
2025-03-05 17:08:18 +00:00
Brent Westbrook
d0623888b3
[syntax-errors] Positional-only parameters before Python 3.8 (#16481)
Summary
--

Detect positional-only parameters before Python 3.8, as marked by the
`/` separator in a parameter list.

Test Plan
--
Inline tests.
2025-03-05 13:46:43 +00:00
Brent Westbrook
81bcdcebd3
[syntax-errors] Type parameter lists before Python 3.12 (#16479)
Summary
--

Another simple one, just detect type parameter lists in functions
and classes. Like pyright, we don't emit a second diagnostic for
`type` alias statements, which were also introduced in 3.12.

Test Plan
--
Inline tests.
2025-03-05 13:19:09 +00:00
Brent Westbrook
32c66ec4b7
[syntax-errors] type alias statements before Python 3.12 (#16478)
Summary
--
Another simple one, just detect standalone `type` statements. I limited
the diagnostic to `type` itself like [pyright]. That probably makes the
most sense for more complicated examples.

Test Plan
--
Inline tests.

[pyright]:
https://pyright-play.net/?pythonVersion=3.8&strict=true&code=C4TwDgpgBAHlC8UCWA7YQ
2025-03-04 17:20:10 +00:00
Brent Westbrook
e7b93f93ef
[syntax-errors] Type parameter defaults before Python 3.13 (#16447)
Summary
--

Detects the presence of a [PEP 696] type parameter default before Python
3.13.

Test Plan
--

New inline parser tests for type aliases, generic functions and generic
classes.

[PEP 696]: https://peps.python.org/pep-0696/#grammar-changes
2025-03-04 16:53:38 +00:00
Brent Westbrook
c8a06a9be8
[syntax-errors] Limit except* range to * (#16473)
Summary
--
This is a follow-up to #16446 to fix the diagnostic range to point to
the `*` like `pyright` does
(https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/pull/16446#discussion_r1976900643).

Storing the range in the `ExceptClauseKind::Star` variant feels slightly
awkward, but we don't store the star itself anywhere on the
`ExceptHandler`. And we can't just take `ExceptHandler.start() +
"except".text_len()` because this code appears to be valid:

```python
try: ...
except    *    Error: ...
```

Test Plan
--
Existing tests.
2025-03-04 16:50:09 +00:00
Brent Westbrook
e924ecbdac
[syntax-errors] except* before Python 3.11 (#16446)
Summary
--

One of the simpler ones, just detect the use of `except*` before 3.11.

Test Plan
--

New inline tests.
2025-03-02 18:20:18 +00:00
Brent Westbrook
4431978262
[syntax-errors] Assignment expressions before Python 3.8 (#16383)
## Summary
This PR is the first in a series derived from
https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/pull/16308, each of which add support
for detecting one version-related syntax error from
https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/issues/6591. This one should be
the largest because it also includes the addition of the 
`Parser::add_unsupported_syntax_error` method

Otherwise I think the general structure will be the same for each syntax
error:
* Detecting the error in the parser
* Inline parser tests for the new error
* New ruff CLI tests for the new error

## Test Plan
As noted above, there are new inline parser tests, as well as new ruff
CLI
tests. Once https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/pull/16379 is resolved,
there should also be new mdtests for red-knot,
but this PR does not currently include those.
2025-02-28 17:13:46 -05:00
Brent Westbrook
764aa0e6a1
Allow passing ParseOptions to inline tests (#16357)
## Summary

This PR adds support for a pragma-style header for inline parser tests
containing JSON-serialized `ParseOptions`. For example,

```python
# parse_options: { "target-version": "3.9" }
match 2:
    case 1:
        pass
```

The line must start with `# parse_options: ` and then the rest of the
(trimmed) line is deserialized into `ParseOptions` used for parsing the
the test.

## Test Plan

Existing inline tests, plus two new inline tests for
`match-before-py310`.

---------

Co-authored-by: Alex Waygood <alex.waygood@gmail.com>
2025-02-27 10:23:15 -05:00
Brent Westbrook
78806361fd
Start detecting version-related syntax errors in the parser (#16090)
## 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:


![image](https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/062b4441-740e-46c3-887c-a954049ef26e)

![image](https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/101f55b8-146c-4d59-b6b0-922f19bcd0fa)

---------

Co-authored-by: Alex Waygood <alex.waygood@gmail.com>
2025-02-25 23:03:48 -05:00
Brent Westbrook
97d0659ce3
Pass ParserOptions to the parser (#16220)
## 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.
2025-02-19 10:50:50 -05:00
Alex Waygood
cb71393332
Simplify the StringFlags trait (#15944) 2025-02-04 18:14:28 +00:00
Shaygan Hooshyari
cf4ab7cba1
Parse triple quoted string annotations as if parenthesized (#15387)
## Summary

Resolves #9467 

Parse quoted annotations as if the string content is inside parenthesis.
With this logic `x` and `y` in this example are equal:

```python
y: """
   int |
   str
"""

z: """(
    int |
    str
)
"""
```

Also this rule only applies to triple
quotes([link](https://github.com/python/typing-council/issues/9#issuecomment-1890808610)).

This PR is based on the
[comments](https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/issues/9467#issuecomment-2579180991)
on the issue.

I did one extra change, since we don't want any indentation tokens I am
setting the `State::Other` as the initial state of the Lexer.

Remaining work:

- [x] Add a test case for red-knot.
- [x] Add more tests.

## Test Plan

Added a test which previously failed because quoted annotation contained
indentation.
Added an mdtest for red-knot.
Updated previous test.

Co-authored-by: Dhruv Manilawala <dhruvmanila@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Micha Reiser <micha@reiser.io>
2025-01-16 11:38:15 +05:30
Dylan
c1eaf6ff72
Modify parsing of raise with cause when exception is absent (#15049)
When confronted with `raise from exc` the parser will now create a
`StmtRaise` that has `None` for the exception and `exc` for the cause.

Before, the parser created a `StmtRaise` with `from` for the exception,
no cause, and a spurious expression `exc` afterwards.
2024-12-19 13:36:32 +00:00
Dylan
a3bb0cd5ec
Raise syntax error for mixing except and except* (#14895)
Some checks are pending
CI / Determine changes (push) Waiting to run
CI / cargo fmt (push) Waiting to run
CI / cargo clippy (push) Blocked by required conditions
CI / cargo test (linux) (push) Blocked by required conditions
CI / cargo test (linux, release) (push) Blocked by required conditions
CI / cargo test (windows) (push) Blocked by required conditions
CI / cargo test (wasm) (push) Blocked by required conditions
CI / cargo build (release) (push) Waiting to run
CI / cargo build (msrv) (push) Blocked by required conditions
CI / cargo fuzz build (push) Blocked by required conditions
CI / fuzz parser (push) Blocked by required conditions
CI / test scripts (push) Blocked by required conditions
CI / ecosystem (push) Blocked by required conditions
CI / cargo shear (push) Blocked by required conditions
CI / python package (push) Waiting to run
CI / pre-commit (push) Waiting to run
CI / mkdocs (push) Waiting to run
CI / formatter instabilities and black similarity (push) Blocked by required conditions
CI / test ruff-lsp (push) Blocked by required conditions
CI / benchmarks (push) Blocked by required conditions
This PR adds a syntax error if the parser encounters a `TryStmt` that
has except clauses both with and without a star.

The displayed error points to each except clause that contradicts the
original except clause kind. So, for example,

```python
try:
    ....
except:     #<-- we assume this is the desired except kind
    ....
except*:    #<---  error will point here
    ....
except*:    #<--- and here
    ....
```

Closes #14860
2024-12-10 17:50:55 -06:00
Dimitri Papadopoulos Orfanos
59145098d6
Fix typos found by codespell (#14863)
## Summary

Just fix typos.

## Test Plan

CI tests.

---------

Co-authored-by: Micha Reiser <micha@reiser.io>
2024-12-09 09:32:12 +00:00
Micha Reiser
b63c2e126b
Upgrade Rust toolchain to 1.83 (#14677) 2024-11-29 12:05:05 +00:00
Micha Reiser
c847cad389
Update insta snapshots (#14366)
Some checks are pending
CI / Determine changes (push) Waiting to run
CI / cargo fmt (push) Waiting to run
CI / cargo shear (push) Blocked by required conditions
CI / cargo clippy (push) Blocked by required conditions
CI / cargo test (linux) (push) Blocked by required conditions
CI / cargo test (windows) (push) Blocked by required conditions
CI / cargo test (wasm) (push) Blocked by required conditions
CI / cargo build (release) (push) Blocked by required conditions
CI / cargo build (msrv) (push) Blocked by required conditions
CI / cargo fuzz (push) Blocked by required conditions
CI / Fuzz the parser (push) Blocked by required conditions
CI / test scripts (push) Blocked by required conditions
CI / ecosystem (push) Blocked by required conditions
CI / python package (push) Waiting to run
CI / pre-commit (push) Waiting to run
CI / mkdocs (push) Waiting to run
CI / formatter instabilities and black similarity (push) Blocked by required conditions
CI / test ruff-lsp (push) Blocked by required conditions
CI / benchmarks (push) Blocked by required conditions
2024-11-15 19:31:15 +01:00
Micha Reiser
138e70bd5c
Upgrade to Rust 1.80 (#12586) 2024-07-30 19:18:08 +00:00
Dhruv Manilawala
978909fcf4
Raise syntax error for unparenthesized generator expr in multi-argument call (#12445)
## Summary

This PR fixes a bug to raise a syntax error when an unparenthesized
generator expression is used as an argument to a call when there are
more than one argument.

For reference, the grammar is:
```
primary:
    | ...
    | primary genexp 
    | primary '(' [arguments] ')' 
    | ...

genexp:
    | '(' ( assignment_expression | expression !':=') for_if_clauses ')' 
```

The `genexp` requires the parenthesis as mentioned in the grammar. So,
the grammar for a call expression is either a name followed by a
generator expression or a name followed by a list of argument. In the
former case, the parenthesis are excluded because the generator
expression provides them while in the later case, the parenthesis are
explicitly provided for a list of arguments which means that the
generator expression requires it's own parenthesis.

This was discovered in https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/issues/12420.

## Test Plan

Add test cases for valid and invalid syntax.

Make sure that the parser from CPython also raises this at the parsing
step:
```console
$ python3.13 -m ast parser/_.py
  File "parser/_.py", line 1
    total(1, 2, x for x in range(5), 6)
                ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
SyntaxError: Generator expression must be parenthesized

$ python3.13 -m ast parser/_.py
  File "parser/_.py", line 1
    sum(x for x in range(10), 10)
        ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
SyntaxError: Generator expression must be parenthesized
```
2024-07-22 14:44:20 +05:30
Micha Reiser
5109b50bb3
Use CompactString for Identifier (#12101) 2024-07-01 10:06:02 +02:00
Micha Reiser
da78de0439
Remove allcation in parse_identifier (#12103) 2024-06-29 15:00:24 +02:00
Dhruv Manilawala
7cb2619ef5
Add syntax error for empty type parameter list (#12030)
## Summary

(I'm pretty sure I added this in the parser re-write but must've got
lost in the rebase?)

This PR raises a syntax error if the type parameter list is empty.

As per the grammar, there should be at least one type parameter:
```
type_params: 
    | invalid_type_params
    | '[' type_param_seq ']' 

type_param_seq: ','.type_param+ [','] 
```

Verified via the builtin `ast` module as well:
```console    
$ python3.13 -m ast parser/_.py
Traceback (most recent call last):
  [..]
  File "parser/_.py", line 1
    def foo[]():
            ^
SyntaxError: Type parameter list cannot be empty
```

## Test Plan

Add inline test cases and update the snapshots.
2024-06-26 08:10:35 +05:30
renovate[bot]
53a80a5c11
Update Rust crate rustc-hash to v2 (#12001) 2024-06-23 20:46:42 -04:00
Dhruv Manilawala
96da136e6a
Move token and error structs into related modules (#11957)
## Summary

This PR does some housekeeping into moving certain structs into related
modules. Specifically,
1. Move `LexicalError` from `lexer.rs` to `error.rs` which also contains
the `ParseError`
2. Move `Token`, `TokenFlags` and `TokenValue` from `lexer.rs` to
`token.rs`
2024-06-21 10:07:19 +00:00
Dhruv Manilawala
1e0642fac8
Use re-lexing for normal list parsing (#11871)
## Summary

This PR is a follow-up on #11845 to add the re-lexing logic for normal
list parsing.

A normal list parsing is basically parsing elements without any
separator in between i.e., there can only be trivia tokens in between
the two elements. Currently, this is only being used for parsing
**assignment statement** and **f-string elements**. Assignment
statements cannot be in a parenthesized context, but f-string can have
curly braces so this PR is specifically for them.

I don't think this is an ideal recovery but the problem is that both
lexer and parser could add an error for f-strings. If the lexer adds an
error it'll emit an `Unknown` token instead while the parser adds the
error directly. I think we'd need to move all f-string errors to be
emitted by the parser instead. This way the parser can correctly inform
the lexer that it's out of an f-string and then the lexer can pop the
current f-string context out of the stack.

## Test Plan

Add test cases, update the snapshots, and run the fuzzer.
2024-06-18 12:14:41 +05:30
Dhruv Manilawala
8499abfa7f
Implement re-lexing logic for better error recovery (#11845)
## Summary

This PR implements the re-lexing logic in the parser.

This logic is only applied when recovering from an error during list
parsing. The logic is as follows:
1. During list parsing, if an unexpected token is encountered and it
detects that an outer context can understand it and thus recover from
it, it invokes the re-lexing logic in the lexer
2. This logic first checks if the lexer is in a parenthesized context
and returns if it's not. Thus, the logic is a no-op if the lexer isn't
in a parenthesized context
3. It then reduces the nesting level by 1. It shouldn't reset it to 0
because otherwise the recovery from nested list parsing will be
incorrect
4. Then, it tries to find last newline character going backwards from
the current position of the lexer. This avoids any whitespaces but if it
encounters any character other than newline or whitespace, it aborts.
5. Now, if there's a newline character, then it needs to be re-lexed in
a logical context which means that the lexer needs to emit it as a
`Newline` token instead of `NonLogicalNewline`.
6. If the re-lexing gives a different token than the current one, the
token source needs to update it's token collection to remove all the
tokens which comes after the new current position.

It turns out that the list parsing isn't that happy with the results so
it requires some re-arranging such that the following two errors are
raised correctly:
1. Expected comma
2. Recovery context error

For (1), the following scenarios needs to be considered:
* Missing comma between two elements
* Half parsed element because the grammar doesn't allow it (for example,
named expressions)

For (2), the following scenarios needs to be considered:
1. If the parser is at a comma which means that there's a missing
element otherwise the comma would've been consumed by the first `eat`
call above. And, the parser doesn't take the re-lexing route on a comma
token.
2. If it's the first element and the current token is not a comma which
means that it's an invalid element.

resolves: #11640 

## Test Plan

- [x] Update existing test snapshots and validate them
- [x] Add additional test cases specific to the re-lexing logic and
validate the snapshots
- [x] Run the fuzzer on 3000+ valid inputs
- [x] Run the fuzzer on invalid inputs
- [x] Run the parser on various open source projects
- [x] Make sure the ecosystem changes are none
2024-06-17 06:47:00 +00:00
Dhruv Manilawala
60ea72a6bc
Add list terminator kind for error recovery (#11843)
## Summary

This PR adds a new enum to determine the kind of terminator token i.e.,
is it actually terminates the list or is it used for error recovery.

This is important because the parser should take the error recovery
route in case the terminator token is used for better error recovery.
This will then try to re-lex the token if it's the case.

I haven't updated any reference to use this new enum as otherwise it'll
update the snapshots. I plan to do that in a follow-up PR so that it's
easier to reason about.

## Test plan

`cargo insta test`
2024-06-12 08:33:26 +00:00
Dhruv Manilawala
a525b4be3d
Separate terminator token for f-string elements kind (#11842)
## Summary

This PR separates the terminator token for f-string elements depending
on the context. A list of f-string element can occur either in a regular
f-string or a format spec of an f-string. The terminator token is
different depending on that context.

## Test Plan

`cargo insta test` and verify the updated snapshots.
2024-06-12 13:57:35 +05:30
Dhruv Manilawala
549cc1e437
Build CommentRanges outside the parser (#11792)
## Summary

This PR updates the parser to remove building the `CommentRanges` and
instead it'll be built by the linter and the formatter when it's
required.

For the linter, it'll be built and owned by the `Indexer` while for the
formatter it'll be built from the `Tokens` struct and passed as an
argument.

## Test Plan

`cargo insta test`
2024-06-09 09:55:17 +00:00
Dhruv Manilawala
1b7d08c2c9
Consider : to terminate parenthesized with items (#11775)
## Summary

This PR is a follow-up to this discussion
(https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/pull/11770#discussion_r1628917209)
which adds the `:` token in the terminator set for parenthesized with
items.

The main motivation is to avoid parsing too much in speculative mode.
This is evident with the following _before_ and _after_ parsed with
items list for the following code:

```py
with (item1, item2:
    foo
```

<table>
  <tr>
    <th>Before (3 items)</th>
    <th>After (2 items)</th>
  </tr>
  <tr>
    <td>
<pre>
parsed_with_items: [
    ParsedWithItem {
        item: WithItem {
            range: 6..11,
            context_expr: Name(
                ExprName {
                    range: 6..11,
                    id: "item1",
                    ctx: Load,
                },
            ),
            optional_vars: None,
        },
        is_parenthesized: false,
    },
    ParsedWithItem {
        item: WithItem {
            range: 13..18,
            context_expr: Name(
                ExprName {
                    range: 13..18,
                    id: "item2",
                    ctx: Load,
                },
            ),
            optional_vars: None,
        },
        is_parenthesized: false,
    },
    ParsedWithItem {
        item: WithItem {
            range: 24..27,
            context_expr: Name(
                ExprName {
                    range: 24..27,
                    id: "foo",
                    ctx: Load,
                },
            ),
            optional_vars: None,
        },
        is_parenthesized: false,
    },
]
</pre>
	</td>
    <td>
<pre>
parsed_with_items: [
    ParsedWithItem {
        item: WithItem {
            range: 6..11,
            context_expr: Name(
                ExprName {
                    range: 6..11,
                    id: "item1",
                    ctx: Load,
                },
            ),
            optional_vars: None,
        },
        is_parenthesized: false,
    },
    ParsedWithItem {
        item: WithItem {
            range: 13..18,
            context_expr: Name(
                ExprName {
                    range: 13..18,
                    id: "item2",
                    ctx: Load,
                },
            ),
            optional_vars: None,
        },
        is_parenthesized: false,
    },
]
</pre>
	</td>
  </tr>
</table>

## Test Plan

`cargo insta test`
2024-06-06 18:40:44 +05:30
Dhruv Manilawala
6c1fa1d440
Use speculative parsing for with-items (#11770)
## Summary

This PR updates the with-items parsing logic to use speculative parsing
instead.

### Existing logic

First, let's understand the previous logic:
1. The parser sees `(`, it doesn't know whether it's part of a
parenthesized with items or a parenthesized expression
2. Consider it a parenthesized with items and perform a hand-rolled
speculative parsing
3. Then, verify the assumption and if it's incorrect convert the parsed
with items into an appropriate expression which becomes part of the
first with item

Here, in (3) there are lots of edge cases which we've to deal with:
1. Trailing comma with a single element should be [converted to the
expression as
is](9b2cf569b2/crates/ruff_python_parser/src/parser/statement.rs (L2140-L2153))
2. Trailing comma with multiple elements should be [converted to a tuple
expression](9b2cf569b2/crates/ruff_python_parser/src/parser/statement.rs (L2155-L2178))
3. Limit the allowed expression based on whether it's
[(1)](9b2cf569b2/crates/ruff_python_parser/src/parser/statement.rs (L2144-L2152))
or
[(2)](9b2cf569b2/crates/ruff_python_parser/src/parser/statement.rs (L2157-L2171))
4. [Consider postfix
expressions](9b2cf569b2/crates/ruff_python_parser/src/parser/statement.rs (L2181-L2200))
after (3)
5. [Consider `if`
expressions](9b2cf569b2/crates/ruff_python_parser/src/parser/statement.rs (L2203-L2208))
after (3)
6. [Consider binary
expressions](9b2cf569b2/crates/ruff_python_parser/src/parser/statement.rs (L2210-L2228))
after (3)

Consider other cases like
* [Single generator
expression](9b2cf569b2/crates/ruff_python_parser/src/parser/statement.rs (L2020-L2035))
* [Expecting a
comma](9b2cf569b2/crates/ruff_python_parser/src/parser/statement.rs (L2122-L2130))

And, this is all possible only if we allow parsing these expressions in
the [with item parsing
logic](9b2cf569b2/crates/ruff_python_parser/src/parser/statement.rs (L2287-L2334)).

### Speculative parsing

With #11457 merged, we can simplify this logic by changing the step (3)
from above to just rewind the parser back to the `(` if our assumption
(parenthesized with-items) was incorrect and then continue parsing it
considering parenthesized expression.

This also behaves a lot similar to what a PEG parser does which is to
consider the first grammar rule and if it fails consider the second
grammar rule and so on.

resolves: #11639 

## Test Plan

- [x] Verify the updated snapshots
- [x] Run the fuzzer on around 3000 valid source code (locally)
2024-06-06 08:59:56 +00:00
Dhruv Manilawala
3b19df04d7
Use cursor offset for lexer checkpoint (#11734)
## Summary

This PR updates the lexer checkpoint to store the cursor offset instead
of cloning the cursor itself. This reduces the size of `LexerCheckpoint`
from 136 to 112 bytes and also removes the need for lifetime.

## Test Plan

`cargo insta test`
2024-06-04 14:13:57 +05:30