## Summary
This is really bad PR hygiene, but a mix of: using `Locator`-based fixes
in a few places (in lieu of `Generator`-based fixes), using match syntax
to avoid `.len() == 1` checks, using common helpers in more places, etc.
## Test Plan
`cargo test`
## Summary
I kind of hate the light mode theme, but they now use colors from our
actual palette:
<img width="1792" alt="Screen Shot 2023-07-13 at 10 15 14 PM"
src="f1da0153-d6ed-4b65-9419-b824f2cad614">
<img width="1792" alt="Screen Shot 2023-07-13 at 10 15 12 PM"
src="d9452e10-796b-4b7f-bf3f-7af6e0b14fc0">
<img width="1792" alt="Screen Shot 2023-07-13 at 10 15 10 PM"
src="f75e7c1c-3b5a-4a78-8bb8-d8b4d40a337d">
<img width="1792" alt="Screen Shot 2023-07-13 at 10 15 07 PM"
src="52c23108-b9c2-4a1f-adf0-e11098dbdc5d">
## Summary
These changes make `scripts/ecosystem_all_check.sh --select ALL` work
again, i forgot to update this script to the new directory structure
from #5299 because it's only run manually
## Test Plan
n/a
## Summary
Consider single element subscript expr for implicit optional.
On `main`, the cases where there is only a single element in the
subscript
list was giving false positives such as for the following:
```python
typing.Union[None]
typing.Literal[None]
```
## Test Plan
`cargo test`
---------
Co-authored-by: Charlie Marsh <charlie.r.marsh@gmail.com>
## Summary
Check for `Any` in other types for `ANN401`. This reuses the logic from
`implicit-optional` rule to resolve the type to `Any`.
Following types are supported:
* `Union[Any, ...]`
* `Any | ...`
* `Optional[Any]`
* `Annotated[<any of the above variant>, ...]`
* Forward references i.e., `"Any | ..."`
## Test Plan
Added test cases for various combinations.
fixes: #5458
## Summary
Do not raise `EXE001` and `EXE002` if WSL is detected. Uses the
[`wsl`](https://crates.io/crates/wsl) crate.
Closes#5445.
## Test Plan
`cargo test`
I don't use Windows, so was unable to test on a WSL environment. It
would be good if someone who runs Windows could check the functionality.
## Summary
Python doesn't allow `"Foo" | None` if the annotation will be evaluated
at runtime (see the comments in the PR, or the semantic model
documentation for more on what this means and when it is true), but it
_does_ allow it if the annotation is typing-only.
This, for example, is invalid, as Python will evaluate `"Foo" | None` at
runtime in order to
populate the function's `__annotations__`:
```python
def f(x: "Foo" | None): ...
```
This, however, is valid:
```python
def f():
x: "Foo" | None
```
As is this:
```python
from __future__ import annotations
def f(x: "Foo" | None): ...
```
Closes#5706.
## Summary
`StmtAnnAssign` would not insert parentheses when breaking the same way
`StmtAssign` does, causing unstable formatting and likely some syntax
errors.
## Test Plan
I added a regression test.
## Summary
This adds links to issue categories that are good for people looking to
implement something and a link to the contributing guide feedback issue
(https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/issues/5684)
---------
Co-authored-by: Zanie <contact@zanie.dev>
## Summary
The previous dummy was causing instabilities since it turned a string
into a variable.
E.g.
```python
script_header_dict[
"slurm_partition_line"
] = f"#SBATCH --partition {resources.queue_name}"
```
has an instability as
```python
- script_header_dict["slurm_partition_line"] = (
- NOT_YET_IMPLEMENTED_ExprJoinedStr
- )
+ script_header_dict[
+ "slurm_partition_line"
+ ] = NOT_YET_IMPLEMENTED_ExprJoinedStr
```
## Test Plan
The instability is gone, otherwise it's still a dummy
## Summary
Implement Pylint rule [`consider-using-in`
(`R1714`)](https://pylint.pycqa.org/en/latest/user_guide/messages/refactor/consider-using-in.html)
as `repeated-equality-comparison-target` (`PLR1714`). This rule checks
for expressions that can be re-written as a membership test for better
readability and performance.
For example,
```python
foo == "bar" or foo == "baz" or foo == "qux"
```
should be rewritten as
```python
foo in {"bar", "baz", "qux"}
```
Related to #970. Includes documentation.
### Implementation quirks
The implementation does not work with Yoda conditions (e.g., `"a" ==
foo` instead of `foo == "a"`). The Pylint version does. I couldn't find
a way of supporting Yoda-style conditions without it being inefficient,
so didn't (I don't think people write Yoda conditions any way).
## Test Plan
Added fixture.
`cargo test`
## Summary
We have two `Cursor` implementations. This PR moves the implementation
from the formatter into `ruff_python_whitespace` (kind of a poorly-named
crate now) and uses it for both use-cases.
## Summary
This job runs whenever I put up a PR to bump the version, which is
really useful. But then it also runs again when I merge, and then _that_
job tends to get cancelled immediately, because I run the _actual_
release job, which triggers the cancel-concurrent-runs flow. (See, e.g.,
5534191373.)
I think it makes sense to run these on PR (when editing `pyproject.toml`
and friends), but not again on merge.
## Summary
Document all `ruff_dev` subcommands and document the `format_dev` flags
in the formatter readme.
CC @zanieb please flag everything that isn't clear or missing
## Test Plan
n/a
Python 3.7 is EOL and we should use the latest stable version for
builds.
Related to https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff-lsp/pull/189
---------
Co-authored-by: konsti <konstin@mailbox.org>
Detects invalid types for tuple, list, bytes, string indices.
For example, the following will raise a `TypeError` at runtime and when
imported Python will display a `SyntaxWarning`
```python
var = [1, 2, 3]["x"]
```
```
example.py:1: SyntaxWarning: list indices must be integers or slices, not str; perhaps you missed a comma?
var = [1, 2, 3]["x"]
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "example.py", line 1, in <module>
var = [1, 2, 3]["x"]
~~~~~~~~~^^^^^
TypeError: list indices must be integers or slices, not str
```
Previously, Ruff would not report the invalid syntax but now a violation
will be reported. This does not apply to cases where a variable, call,
or complex expression is used in the index — detection is roughly
limited to static definitions, which matches Python's warnings.
```
❯ ./target/debug/ruff example.py --select RUF015 --show-source --no-cache
example.py:1:17: RUF015 Indexed access to type `list` uses type `str` instead of an integer or slice.
|
1 | var = [1, 2, 3]["x"]
| ^^^ RUF015
|
```
Closes https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/issues/5082
xref
ffff1440d1
## Summary
Replaces `DictionaryKey` enum with the more general `ComparableExpr`
when checking for duplicate keys
## Test Plan
Added test fixture from issue. Can potentially be expanded further
depending on what exactly we want to flag (e.g. do we also want to check
for unhashable types?) and which `ComparableExpr::XYZ` types we consider
literals.
## Issue link
Closes: https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/issues/5691
## Summary
Similar to #5567, we can remove the use of regex, plus simplify the
representation (use `Option`), add snapshot tests, etc.
This is about 100x faster than using a regex for cases that match (2.5ns
vs. 250ns). It's obviously not a hot path, but I prefer the consistency
with other similar comment-parsing. I may DRY these up into some common
functionality later on.
<!--
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 matches Black' behavior where it only omits the optional parentheses if the expression starts or ends with a parenthesized expression:
```python
a + [aaa, bbb, cccc] * c # Don't omit
[aaa, bbb, cccc] + a * c # Split
a + c * [aaa, bbb, ccc] # Split
```
<!-- What's the purpose of the change? What does it do, and why? -->
## Test Plan
This improves the Jaccard index from 0.945 to 0.946
<!--
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 improves the Black compatibility when it comes to breaking comprehensions.
We want to avoid line breaks before the target and `in` whenever possible. Furthermore, `if X is not None` should be grouped together, similar to other binary like expressions
<!-- What's the purpose of the change? What does it do, and why? -->
## Test Plan
`cargo test`
<!-- How was it tested? -->
## Summary
We don't use `ModExpression` anywhere but it's part of the AST, removes
one `not_implemented_yet` and is a trivial 2-liner, so i implemented
formatting for `ModExpression`.
## Test Plan
None, this kind of node does not occur in file input. Otherwise all the
tests for expressions
<!--
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 started working on this because I assumed that I would need access to options inside of `NeedsParantheses` but it then turned out that I won't.
Anyway, it kind of felt nice to pass fewer arguments. So I'm gonna put this out here to get your feedback if you prefer this over passing individual fiels.
Oh, I sneeked in another change. I renamed `context.contents` to `source`. `contents` is too generic and doesn't tell you anything.
<!-- What's the purpose of the change? What does it do, and why? -->
## Test Plan
It compiles
