mirror of
https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff.git
synced 2025-10-17 05:47:49 +00:00
55d6fd53cd
## Summary
Given:
```python
def double(a: int) -> ( # Hello
int
):
return 2*a
```
We currently treat `# Hello` as a trailing comment on the parameters
(`(a: int)`). This PR adds a placement method to instead treat it as a
dangling comment on the function definition itself, so that it gets
formatted at the end of the definition, like:
```python
def double(a: int) -> int: # Hello
return 2*a
```
The formatting in this case is unchanged, but it's incorrect IMO for
that to be a trailing comment on the parameters, and that placement
leads to an instability after changing the grouping in #6410.
Fixing this led to a _different_ instability related to tuple return
type annotations, like:
```python
def zrevrangebylex(self, name: _Key, max: _Value, min: _Value, start: int | None = None, num: int | None = None) -> ( # type: ignore[override]
):
...
```
(This is a real example.)
To fix, I had to special-case tuples in that spot, though I'm not
certain that's correct.
|
||
|---|---|---|
| .. | ||
| flake8_to_ruff | ||
| ruff | ||
| ruff_benchmark | ||
| ruff_cache | ||
| ruff_cli | ||
| ruff_dev | ||
| ruff_diagnostics | ||
| ruff_formatter | ||
| ruff_index | ||
| ruff_macros | ||
| ruff_python_ast | ||
| ruff_python_codegen | ||
| ruff_python_formatter | ||
| ruff_python_index | ||
| ruff_python_literal | ||
| ruff_python_parser | ||
| ruff_python_resolver | ||
| ruff_python_semantic | ||
| ruff_python_stdlib | ||
| ruff_python_trivia | ||
| ruff_shrinking | ||
| ruff_source_file | ||
| ruff_text_size | ||
| ruff_wasm | ||