<!--
Thank you for contributing to Ruff/ty! 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? (Please prefix
with `[ty]` for ty pull
requests.)
- Does this pull request include references to any relevant issues?
-->
## Summary
<!-- What's the purpose of the change? What does it do, and why? -->
update the argument `datasets` as `assets`
## Test Plan
<!-- How was it tested? -->
update fixture accordingly
<!--
Thank you for contributing to Ruff/ty! 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? (Please prefix
with `[ty]` for ty pull
requests.)
- Does this pull request include references to any relevant issues?
-->
## Summary
<!-- What's the purpose of the change? What does it do, and why? -->
### What
Change the message from "DAG should have an explicit `schedule`
argument" to "`DAG` or `@dag` should have an explicit `schedule`
argument"
### Why
We're trying to get rid of the idea that DAG in airflow was Directed
acyclic graph. Thus, change it to refer to the class `DAG` or the
decorator `@dag` might help a bit.
## Test Plan
<!-- How was it tested? -->
update the test fixtures accordly
## Summary
This PR fixes#7352 by exposing the `show_fix_diff` option used in our
snapshot tests in the CLI. As the issue suggests, we plan to make this
the default output format in the future, so this is added to the `full`
output format in preview for now.
This turned out to be pretty straightforward. I just used our existing
`Applicability` settings to determine whether or not to print the diff.
The snapshot differences are because we now set
`Applicability::DisplayOnly` for our snapshot tests. This
`Applicability` is also used to determine whether or not the fix icon
(`[*]`) is rendered, so this is now shown for display-only fixes in our
snapshots. This was already the case previously, but we were only
setting `Applicability::Unsafe` in these tests and ignoring the
`Applicability` when rendering fix diffs. CLI users can't enable
display-only fixes, so this is only a test change for now, but this
should work smoothly if we decide to expose a `--display-only-fixes`
flag or similar in the future.
I also deleted the `PrinterFlags::SHOW_FIX_DIFF` flag. This was
completely unused before, and it seemed less confusing just to delete it
than to enable it in the right place and check it along with the
`OutputFormat` and `preview`.
## Test Plan
I only added one CLI test for now. I'm kind of assuming that we have
decent coverage of the cases where this shouldn't be firing, especially
the `output_format` CLI test, which shows that this definitely doesn't
affect non-preview `full` output. I'm happy to add more tests with
different combinations of options, if we're worried about any in
particular. I did try `--diff` and `--preview` and a few other
combinations manually.
And here's a screenshot using our trusty UP049 example from the design
discussion confirming that all the colors and other formatting still
look as expected:
<img width="786" height="629" alt="image"
src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/94e408bc-af7b-4573-b546-a5ceac2620f2"
/>
And one with an unsafe fix to see the footer:
<img width="782" height="367" alt="image"
src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/bbb29e47-310b-4293-b2c2-cc7aee3baff4"
/>
## Related issues and PR
- https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/issues/7352
- https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/pull/12595
- https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/issues/12598
- https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/issues/12599
- https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/issues/12600
I think we could probably close all of these issues now. I think we've
either resolved or avoided most of them, and if we encounter them again
with the new output format, it would probably make sense to open new
ones anyway.
This pull request fixes the bug described in issue
[#19153](https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/issues/19153).
The issue occurred when `PERF403` incorrectly flagged cases involving
tuple unpacking in a for loop. For example:
```python
def f():
v = {}
for (o, p), x in [("op", "x")]:
v[x] = o, p
```
This code was wrongly suggested to be rewritten into a dictionary
comprehension, which changes the semantics.
Changes in this PR:
Updated the `PERF403` rule to correctly handle tuple unpacking in loop
targets.
Added regression tests to ensure this case (and similar ones) are no
longer flagged incorrectly.
Why:
This ensures that `PERF403` only triggers when a dictionary
comprehension is semantically equivalent to the original loop,
preventing false positives.
---------
Co-authored-by: Brent Westbrook <brentrwestbrook@gmail.com>
## Summary
Adds new rule to catch use of builtins `input()` in async functions.
Issue #8451
## Test Plan
New snapshosts in `ASYNC250.py` with `cargo insta test`.
## Summary
I spun this off from #19919 to separate the rendering code change and
snapshot updates from the (much smaller) changes to expose this in the
CLI. I grouped all of the `ruff_linter` snapshot changes in the final
commit in an effort to make this easier to review. The code changes are
in [this
range](619395eb41).
I went through all of the snapshots, albeit fairly quickly, and they all
looked correct to me. In the last few commits I was trying to resolve an
existing issue in the alignment of the line number separator:
73720c73be/crates/ruff_linter/src/rules/flake8_comprehensions/snapshots/ruff_linter__rules__flake8_comprehensions__tests__C409_C409.py.snap (L87-L89)
In the snapshot above on `main`, you can see that a double-digit line
number at the end of the context lines for a snippet was causing a
misalignment with the other separators. That's now resolved. The one
downside is that this can lead to a mismatch with the diagnostic above:
```
C409 [*] Unnecessary list literal passed to `tuple()` (rewrite as a tuple literal)
--> C409.py:4:6
|
2 | t2 = tuple([1, 2])
3 | t3 = tuple((1, 2))
4 | t4 = tuple([
| ______^
5 | | 1,
6 | | 2
7 | | ])
| |__^
8 | t5 = tuple(
9 | (1, 2)
|
help: Rewrite as a tuple literal
1 | t1 = tuple([])
2 | t2 = tuple([1, 2])
3 | t3 = tuple((1, 2))
- t4 = tuple([
4 + t4 = (
5 | 1,
6 | 2
- ])
7 + )
8 | t5 = tuple(
9 | (1, 2)
10 | )
note: This is an unsafe fix and may remove comments or change runtime behavior
```
But I don't think we can avoid that without really reworking this
rendering to make the diagnostic and diff rendering aware of each other.
Anyway, this should only happen in relatively rare cases where the
diagnostic is near a digit boundary and also near a context boundary.
Most of our diagnostics line up nicely.
Another potential downside of the new rendering format is its handling
of long stretches of `+` or `-` lines:
```
help: Replace with `Literal[...] | None`
21 | ...
22 |
23 |
- def func6(arg1: Literal[
- "hello",
- None # Comment 1
- , "world"
- ]):
24 + def func6(arg1: Literal["hello", "world"] | None):
25 | ...
26 |
27 |
note: This is an unsafe fix and may remove comments or change runtime behavior
```
To me it just seems a little hard to tell what's going on with just a
long streak of `-`-prefixed lines. I saw an even more exaggerated
example at some point, but I think this is also fairly rare. Most of the
snapshots seem more like the examples we looked at on Discord with
plenty of `|` lines and pairs of `+` and `-` lines.
## Test Plan
Existing tests plus one new test in `ruff_db` to isolate a line
separator alignment issue
<!--
Thank you for contributing to Ruff/ty! 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? (Please prefix
with `[ty]` for ty pull
requests.)
- Does this pull request include references to any relevant issues?
-->
## Summary
<!-- What's the purpose of the change? What does it do, and why? -->
Fixes#19664
Fix allowed unused imports matching for top-level modules.
I've simply replaced `from_dotted_name` with `user_defined`. Since
QualifiedName for imports is created in
crates/ruff_python_semantic/src/imports.rs, I guess it's acceptable to
use `user_defined` here. Please tell me if there is better way.
0c5089ed9e/crates/ruff_python_semantic/src/imports.rs (L62)
## Test Plan
<!-- How was it tested? -->
I've added a snapshot test
`f401_allowed_unused_imports_top_level_module`.
## Summary
This PR is a first step toward adding a GitLab output format to ty. It
converts the `GitlabEmitter` from `ruff_linter` to a `GitlabRenderer` in
`ruff_db` and updates its implementation to handle non-Ruff files and
diagnostics without primary spans. I tried to break up the changes here
so that they're easy to review commit-by-commit, or at least in groups
of commits:
- [preparatory changes in-place in `ruff_linter` and a `ruff_db`
skeleton](0761b73a61)
- [moving the code over with no implementation changes mixed
in](0761b73a61..8f909ea0bb)
- [tidying up the code now in
`ruff_db`](9f047c4f9f..e5e217fcd6)
This wasn't strictly necessary, but I also added some `Serialize`
structs instead of calling `json!` to make it a little clearer that we
weren't modifying the schema (e4c4bee35d).
I plan to follow this up with a separate PR exposing this output format
in the ty CLI, which should be quite straightforward.
## Test Plan
Existing tests, especially the two that show up in the diff as renamed
nearly without changes
## Summary
Adds new rule to find and report use of `httpx.Client` in synchronous
functions.
See issue #8451
## Test Plan
New snapshots for `ASYNC212.py` with `cargo insta test`.
## Summary
Fixes#19581
I decided to add in a `indent_first_line` function into
[`textwrap.rs`](https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/blob/main/crates/ruff_python_trivia/src/textwrap.rs),
as it solely focuses on text manipulation utilities. It follows the same
design as `indent()`, and there may be situations in the future where it
can be reused as well.
---------
Co-authored-by: Brent Westbrook <36778786+ntBre@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Brent Westbrook <brentrwestbrook@gmail.com>
<!--
Thank you for contributing to Ruff/ty! 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? (Please prefix
with `[ty]` for ty pull
requests.)
- Does this pull request include references to any relevant issues?
-->
## Summary
<!-- What's the purpose of the change? What does it do, and why? -->
Extend the following rules.
### AIR311
* `airflow.sensors.base.BaseSensorOperator` →
airflow.sdk.bases.sensor.BaseSensorOperator`
* `airflow.sensors.base.PokeReturnValue` →
airflow.sdk.bases.sensor.PokeReturnValue`
* `airflow.sensors.base.poke_mode_only` →
airflow.sdk.bases.sensor.poke_mode_only`
* `airflow.decorators.base.DecoratedOperator` →
airflow.sdk.bases.decorator.DecoratedOperator`
* `airflow.models.param.Param` → airflow.sdk.definitions.param.Param`
* `airflow.decorators.base.DecoratedMappedOperator` →
`airflow.sdk.bases.decorator.DecoratedMappedOperator`
* `airflow.decorators.base.DecoratedOperator` →
`airflow.sdk.bases.decorator.DecoratedOperator`
* `airflow.decorators.base.TaskDecorator` →
`airflow.sdk.bases.decorator.TaskDecorator`
* `airflow.decorators.base.get_unique_task_id` →
`airflow.sdk.bases.decorator.get_unique_task_id`
* `airflow.decorators.base.task_decorator_factory` →
`airflow.sdk.bases.decorator.task_decorator_factory`
### AIR312
* `airflow.sensors.bash.BashSensor` →
`airflow.providers.standard.sensor.bash.BashSensor`
* `airflow.sensors.python.PythonSensor` →
`airflow.providers.standard.sensors.python.PythonSensor`
## Test Plan
<!-- How was it tested? -->
update the test fixture accordingly in the second commit and reorg in
the third
<!--
Thank you for contributing to Ruff/ty! 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? (Please prefix
with `[ty]` for ty pull
requests.)
- Does this pull request include references to any relevant issues?
-->
## Summary
Part of https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/pull/20100 |
https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/pull/20100#issuecomment-3225349156
<!--
Thank you for contributing to Ruff/ty! 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? (Please prefix
with `[ty]` for ty pull
requests.)
- Does this pull request include references to any relevant issues?
-->
## Summary
Fixes https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/issues/20088
<!-- What's the purpose of the change? What does it do, and why? -->
## Test Plan
`cargo nextest run flake8_use_pathlib`
---------
Co-authored-by: Brent Westbrook <brentrwestbrook@gmail.com>
<!--
Thank you for contributing to Ruff/ty! 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? (Please prefix
with `[ty]` for ty pull
requests.)
- Does this pull request include references to any relevant issues?
-->
## Summary
Part of #20009 (i forgot to delete it in this PR)
<!-- What's the purpose of the change? What does it do, and why? -->
## Test Plan
<!-- How was it tested? -->
Closes#19302
<!--
Thank you for contributing to Ruff/ty! 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? (Please prefix
with `[ty]` for ty pull
requests.)
- Does this pull request include references to any relevant issues?
-->
## Summary
This adds an auto-fix for `Logging statement uses f-string` Ruff G004,
so users don't have to resolve it manually.
<!-- What's the purpose of the change? What does it do, and why? -->
## Test Plan
I ran the auto-fixes on a Python file locally and and it worked as
expected.
<!-- How was it tested? -->
---------
Co-authored-by: Brent Westbrook <36778786+ntBre@users.noreply.github.com>
Summary
--
This PR aims to resolve (or help to resolve) #18442 and #19357 by
encoding the CPython semantics around the `__class__` cell in our
semantic model. Namely,
> `__class__` is an implicit closure reference created by the compiler
if any methods in a class body refer to either `__class__` or super.
from the Python
[docs](https://docs.python.org/3/reference/datamodel.html#creating-the-class-object).
As noted in the variant docs by @AlexWaygood, we don't fully model this
behavior, opting always to create the `__class__` cell binding in a new
`ScopeKind::DunderClassCell` around each method definition, without
checking if any method in the class body actually refers to `__class__`
or `super`.
As such, this PR fixes#18442 but not #19357.
Test Plan
--
Existing tests, plus the tests from #19783, which now pass without any
rule-specific code.
Note that we opted not to alter the behavior of F841 here because
flagging `__class__` in these cases still seems helpful. See the
discussion in
https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/pull/20048#discussion_r2296252395 and
in the test comments for more information.
---------
Co-authored-by: Alex Waygood <Alex.Waygood@Gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Mikko Leppänen <mleppan23@gmail.com>
## Summary
As noted in a code TODO, our `Diff` rendering code previously didn't
have any
special handling for notebooks. This was particularly obvious when the
diffs
were rendered right next to the corresponding diagnostic because the
diagnostic
used cell-based line numbers, while the diff was still using line
numbers from
the concatenated source. This PR updates the diff rendering to handle
notebooks
too.
The main improvements shown in the example below are:
- Line numbers are now remapped to be relative to their cell
- Context lines from other cells are suppressed
```
error[unused-import][*]: `math` imported but unused
--> notebook.ipynb:cell 2:2:8
|
1 | # cell 2
2 | import math
| ^^^^
3 |
4 | print('hello world')
|
help: Remove unused import: `math`
ℹ Safe fix
1 1 | # cell 2
2 |-import math
3 2 |
4 3 | print('hello world')
```
I tried a few different approaches here before finally just splitting
the notebook into separate text ranges by cell and diffing each one
separately. It seems to work and passes all of our tests, but I don't
know if it's actually enforced anywhere that a single edit doesn't span
cells. Such an edit would silently be dropped right now since it would
fail the `contains_range` check. I also feel like I may have overlooked
an existing way to partition a file into cells like this.
## Test Plan
Existing notebook tests, plus a new one in `ruff_db`
## Summary
Removes the `module_ptr` field from `AstNodeRef` in release mode, and
change `NodeIndex` to a `NonZeroU32` to reduce the size of
`Option<AstNodeRef<_>>` fields.
I believe CI runs in debug mode, so this won't show up in the memory
report, but this reduces memory by ~2% in release mode.
Adds a method to `TStringValue` to detect whether the t-string is empty
_as an iterable_. Note the subtlety here that, unlike f-strings, an
empty t-string is still truthy (i.e. `bool(t"")==True`).
Closes#19951
Summary
--
This is a preparatory PR in support of #19919. It moves our `Diff`
rendering code from `ruff_linter` to `ruff_db`, where we have direct
access to the `DiagnosticStylesheet` used by our other diagnostic
rendering code. As shown by the tests, this shouldn't cause any visible
changes. The colors aren't exactly the same, as I note in a TODO
comment, but I don't think there's any existing way to see those, even
in tests.
The `Diff` implementation is mostly unchanged. I just switched from a
Ruff-specific `SourceFile` to a `DiagnosticSource` (removing an
`expect_ruff_source_file` call) and updated the `LineStyle` struct and
other styling calls to use `fmt_styled` and our existing stylesheet.
In support of these changes, I added three styles to our stylesheet:
`insertion` and `deletion` for the corresponding diff operations, and
`underline`, which apparently we _can_ use, as I hoped on Discord. This
isn't supported in all terminals, though. It worked in ghostty but not
in st for me.
I moved the `calculate_print_width` function from the now-deleted
`diff.rs` to a method on `OneIndexed`, where it was available everywhere
we needed it. I'm not sure if that's desirable, or if my other changes
to the function are either (using `ilog10` instead of a loop). This does
make it `const` and slightly simplifies things in my opinion, but I'm
happy to revert it if preferred.
I also inlined a version of `show_nonprinting` from the
`ShowNonprinting` trait in `ruff_linter`:
f4be05a83b/crates/ruff_linter/src/text_helpers.rs (L3-L5)
This trait is now only used in `source_kind.rs`, so I'm not sure it's
worth having the trait or the macro-generated implementation (which is
only called once). This is obviously closely related to our unprintable
character handling in diagnostic rendering, but the usage seems
different enough not to try to combine them.
f4be05a83b/crates/ruff_db/src/diagnostic/render.rs (L990-L998)
We could also move the trait to another crate where we can use it in
`ruff_db` instead of inlining here, of course.
Finally, this PR makes `TextEmitter` a very thin wrapper around a
`DisplayDiagnosticsConfig`. It's still used in a few places, though,
unlike the other emitters we've replaced, so I figured it was worth
keeping around. It's a pretty nice API for setting all of the options on
the config and then passing that along to a `DisplayDiagnostics`.
Test Plan
--
Existing snapshot tests with diffs
## Summary
Resolves#19561
Fixes the [unnecessary-future-import
(UP010)](https://docs.astral.sh/ruff/rules/unnecessary-future-import/)
rule to correctly identify when imported __future__ modules are actually
used in the code, preventing false positives.
I assume there is no way to check usage in `analyze::statements`,
because we don't have any usage bindings for imports. To determine
unused imports, we have to fully scan the file to create bindings and
then check usage, similar to [unused-import
(F401)](https://docs.astral.sh/ruff/rules/unused-import/#unused-import-f401).
So, `Rule::UnnecessaryFutureImport` was moved from the
`analyze::statements` to the `analyze::deferred_scopes` stage. This
caused the need to change the logic of future import handling to a
bindings-based approach.
Also, the diagnostic report was changed.
Before
```
|
1 | from __future__ import nested_scopes, generators
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ UP010
```
after
```
|
1 | from __future__ import nested_scopes, generators
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^ UP010
```
I believe this is the correct way, because `generators` may be used, but
`nested_scopes` is not.
### Special case
I've found out about some specific case.
```python
from __future__ import nested_scopes
nested_scopes = 1
```
Here we can treat `nested_scopes` as an unused import because the
variable `nested_scopes` shadows it and we can safely remove the future
import (my fix does it).
But
[F401](https://docs.astral.sh/ruff/rules/unused-import/#unused-import-f401)
not triggered for such case
([sandbox](https://play.ruff.rs/296d9c7e-0f02-4659-b0c0-78cc21f3de76))
```
from foo import print_function
print_function = 1
```
In my mind, `print_function` here is an unused import and should be
deleted (my IDE highlight it). What do you think?
## Test Plan
Added test cases and snapshots:
- Split test file into separate _0 and _1 files for appropriate checks.
- Added test cases to verify fixes when future module are used.
---------
Co-authored-by: Igor Drokin <drokinii1017@gmail.com>
**Stacked on top of #19849; diff will include that PR until it is
merged.**
---
<!--
Thank you for contributing to Ruff/ty! 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? (Please prefix
with `[ty]` for ty pull
requests.)
- Does this pull request include references to any relevant issues?
-->
## Summary
As part of #19849, I noticed this fix could be implemented.
## Test Plan
Tests added based on CPython behaviour.
## Summary
- Refactored `BLE001` logic for clarity and minor speed-up.
- Improved documentation and comments (previously, `BLE001` docs claimed
it catches bare `except:`s, but it doesn't).
- Fixed a false-positive bug with `from None` cause:
```python
# somefile.py
try:
pass
except BaseException as e:
raise e from None
```
### main branch
```
somefile.py:3:8: BLE001 Do not catch blind exception: `BaseException`
|
1 | try:
2 | pass
3 | except BaseException as e:
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^ BLE001
4 | raise e from None
|
Found 1 error.
```
### this change
```cargo run -p ruff -- check somefile.py --no-cache --select=BLE001```
```
All checks passed!
```
## Test Plan
- Added a test case to cover `raise X from Y` clause
- Added a test case to cover `raise X from None` clause
## Summary
Fixes#19881. While I was here, I also made a couple of related tweaks
to the output format. First, we don't need to strip the `SyntaxError: `
prefix anymore since that's not added directly to the diagnostic message
after #19644. Second, we can use `secondary_code_or_id` to fall back on
the lint ID for syntax errors, which changes the `check_name` from
`syntax-error` to `invalid-syntax`. And then the main change requested
in the issue, prepending the `check_name` to the description.
## Test Plan
Existing tests and a new screenshot from GitLab:
<img width="362" height="113" alt="image"
src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/97654ad4-a639-4489-8c90-8661c7355097"
/>
Summary
--
To take advantage of the new diagnostics, we need to update our caching
model to include all of the information supported by `ruff_db`'s
diagnostic type. Instead of trying to serialize all of this information,
Micha suggested simply not caching files with diagnostics, like we
already do for files with syntax errors. This PR is an attempt at that
approach.
This has the added benefit of trimming down our `Rule` derives since
this was the last place the `FromStr`/`strum_macros::EnumString`
implementation was used, as well as the (de)serialization macros and
`CacheKey`.
Test Plan
--
Existing tests, with their input updated not to include a diagnostic,
plus a new test showing that files with lint diagnostics are not cached.
Benchmarks
--
In addition to tests, we wanted to check that this doesn't degrade
performance too much. I posted part of this new analysis in
https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/issues/18198#issuecomment-3175048672,
but I'll duplicate it here. In short, there's not much difference
between `main` and this branch for projects with few diagnostics
(`home-assistant`, `airflow`), as expected. The difference for projects
with many diagnostics (`cpython`) is quite a bit bigger (~300 ms vs ~220
ms), but most projects that run ruff regularly are likely to have very
few diagnostics, so this may not be a problem practically.
I guess GitHub isn't really rendering this as I intended, but the extra
separator line is meant to separate the benchmarks on `main` (above the
line) from this branch (below the line).
| Command | Mean [ms] | Min [ms] | Max [ms] |
|:--------------------------------------------------------------|----------:|---------:|---------:|
| `ruff check cpython --no-cache --isolated --exit-zero` | 322.0 | 317.5
| 326.2 |
| `ruff check cpython --isolated --exit-zero` | 217.3 | 209.8 | 237.9 |
| `ruff check home-assistant --no-cache --isolated --exit-zero` | 279.5
| 277.0 | 283.6 |
| `ruff check home-assistant --isolated --exit-zero` | 37.2 | 35.7 |
40.6 |
| `ruff check airflow --no-cache --isolated --exit-zero` | 133.1 | 130.4
| 146.4 |
| `ruff check airflow --isolated --exit-zero` | 34.7 | 32.9 | 41.6 |
|:--------------------------------------------------------------|----------:|---------:|---------:|
| `ruff check cpython --no-cache --isolated --exit-zero` | 330.1 | 324.5
| 333.6 |
| `ruff check cpython --isolated --exit-zero` | 309.2 | 306.1 | 314.7 |
| `ruff check home-assistant --no-cache --isolated --exit-zero` | 288.6
| 279.4 | 302.3 |
| `ruff check home-assistant --isolated --exit-zero` | 39.8 | 36.9 |
42.4 |
| `ruff check airflow --no-cache --isolated --exit-zero` | 134.5 | 131.3
| 140.6 |
| `ruff check airflow --isolated --exit-zero` | 39.1 | 37.2 | 44.3 |
I had Claude adapt one of the
[scripts](https://github.com/sharkdp/hyperfine/blob/master/scripts/plot_whisker.py)
from the hyperfine repo to make this plot, so it's not quite perfect,
but maybe it's still useful. The table is probably more reliable for
close comparisons. I'll put more details about the benchmarks below for
the sake of future reproducibility.
<img width="4472" height="2368" alt="image"
src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/1c42d13e-818a-44e7-b34c-247340a936d7"
/>
<details><summary>Benchmark details</summary>
<p>
The versions of each project:
- CPython: 6322edd260e8cad4b09636e05ddfb794a96a0451, the 3.10 branch
from the contributing docs
- `home-assistant`: 5585376b406f099fb29a970b160877b57e5efcb0
- `airflow`: 29a1cb0cfde9d99b1774571688ed86cb60123896
The last two are just the main branches at the time I cloned the repos.
I don't think our Ruff config should be applied since I used
`--isolated`, but these are cloned into my copy of Ruff at
`crates/ruff_linter/resources/test`, and I trimmed the
`./target/release/` prefix from each of the commands, but these are
builds of Ruff in release mode.
And here's the script with the `hyperfine` invocation:
```shell
#!/bin/bash
cargo build --release --bin ruff
# git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/home-assistant/core crates/ruff_linter/resources/test/home-assistant
# git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/apache/airflow crates/ruff_linter/resources/test/airflow
bin=./target/release/ruff
resources=./crates/ruff_linter/resources/test
cpython=$resources/cpython
home_assistant=$resources/home-assistant
airflow=$resources/airflow
base=${1:-bench}
hyperfine --warmup 10 --export-json $base.json --export-markdown $base.md \
"$bin check $cpython --no-cache --isolated --exit-zero" \
"$bin check $cpython --isolated --exit-zero" \
"$bin check $home_assistant --no-cache --isolated --exit-zero" \
"$bin check $home_assistant --isolated --exit-zero" \
"$bin check $airflow --no-cache --isolated --exit-zero" \
"$bin check $airflow --isolated --exit-zero"
```
I ran this once on `main` (`baseline` in the graph, top half of the
table) and once on this branch (`nocache` and bottom of the table).
</p>
</details>
