## Summary
This PR updates the way syntax errors are handled throughout the linter.
The main change is that it's now not considered as a rule which involves
the following changes:
* Update `Message` to be an enum with two variants - one for diagnostic
message and the other for syntax error message
* Provide methods on the new message enum to query information required
by downstream usages
This means that the syntax errors cannot be hidden / disabled via any
disablement methods. These are:
1. Configuration via `select`, `ignore`, `per-file-ignores`, and their
`extend-*` variants
```console
$ cargo run -- check ~/playground/ruff/src/lsp.py --extend-select=E999
--no-preview --no-cache
Finished `dev` profile [unoptimized + debuginfo] target(s) in 0.10s
Running `target/debug/ruff check /Users/dhruv/playground/ruff/src/lsp.py
--extend-select=E999 --no-preview --no-cache`
warning: Rule `E999` is deprecated and will be removed in a future
release. Syntax errors will always be shown regardless of whether this
rule is selected or not.
/Users/dhruv/playground/ruff/src/lsp.py:1:8: F401 [*] `abc` imported but
unused
|
1 | import abc
| ^^^ F401
2 | from pathlib import Path
3 | import os
|
= help: Remove unused import: `abc`
```
3. Command-line flags via `--select`, `--ignore`, `--per-file-ignores`,
and their `--extend-*` variants
```console
$ cargo run -- check ~/playground/ruff/src/lsp.py --no-cache
--config=~/playground/ruff/pyproject.toml
Finished `dev` profile [unoptimized + debuginfo] target(s) in 0.11s
Running `target/debug/ruff check /Users/dhruv/playground/ruff/src/lsp.py
--no-cache --config=/Users/dhruv/playground/ruff/pyproject.toml`
warning: Rule `E999` is deprecated and will be removed in a future
release. Syntax errors will always be shown regardless of whether this
rule is selected or not.
/Users/dhruv/playground/ruff/src/lsp.py:1:8: F401 [*] `abc` imported but
unused
|
1 | import abc
| ^^^ F401
2 | from pathlib import Path
3 | import os
|
= help: Remove unused import: `abc`
```
This also means that the **output format** needs to be updated:
1. The `code`, `noqa_row`, `url` fields in the JSON output is optional
(`null` for syntax errors)
2. Other formats are changed accordingly
For each format, a new test case specific to syntax errors have been
added. Please refer to the snapshot output for the exact format for
syntax error message.
The output of the `--statistics` flag will have a blank entry for syntax
errors:
```
315 F821 [ ] undefined-name
119 [ ] syntax-error
103 F811 [ ] redefined-while-unused
```
The **language server** is updated to consider the syntax errors by
convert them into LSP diagnostic format separately.
### Preview
There are no quick fixes provided to disable syntax errors. This will
automatically work for `ruff-lsp` because the `noqa_row` field will be
`null` in that case.
<img width="772" alt="Screenshot 2024-06-26 at 14 57 08"
src="https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/assets/67177269/aaac827e-4777-4ac8-8c68-eaf9f2c36774">
Even with `noqa` comment, the syntax error is displayed:
<img width="763" alt="Screenshot 2024-06-26 at 14 59 51"
src="https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/assets/67177269/ba1afb68-7eaf-4b44-91af-6d93246475e2">
Rule documentation page:
<img width="1371" alt="Screenshot 2024-06-26 at 16 48 07"
src="https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/assets/67177269/524f01df-d91f-4ac0-86cc-40e76b318b24">
## Test Plan
- [x] Disablement methods via config shows a warning
- [x] `select`, `extend-select`
- [ ] ~`ignore`~ _doesn't show any message_
- [ ] ~`per-file-ignores`, `extend-per-file-ignores`~ _doesn't show any
message_
- [x] Disablement methods via command-line flag shows a warning
- [x] `--select`, `--extend-select`
- [ ] ~`--ignore`~ _doesn't show any message_
- [ ] ~`--per-file-ignores`, `--extend-per-file-ignores`~ _doesn't show
any message_
- [x] File with syntax errors should exit with code 1
- [x] Language server
- [x] Should show diagnostics for syntax errors
- [x] Should not recommend a quick fix edit for adding `noqa` comment
- [x] Same for `ruff-lsp`
resolves: #8447
## Summary
Ensures that we respect per-file ignores and exemptions for these rules.
Specifically, we allow:
```python
# ruff: noqa: PGH004
```
...to ignore `PGH004`.
## Summary
Should resolve https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/issues/11454.
This is my first PR to `ruff`, so I may have missed something.
If I understood the suggestion in the issue correctly, rule `PGH004`
should be set to `Preview` again.
## Test Plan
Created two fixtures derived from the issue.
## Summary
`--add-noqa` now runs in two stages: first, the linter finds all
diagnostics that need noqa comments and generate edits on a per-line
basis. Second, these edits are applied, in order, to the document.
A public-facing function, `generate_noqa_edits`, has also been
introduced, which returns noqa edits generated on a per-diagnostic
basis. This will be used by `ruff server` for noqa comment quick-fixes.
## Test Plan
Unit tests have been updated.
## Summary
Implement duplicate code detection as part of `RUF100`, mirroring the
behavior of `flake8-noqa` (`NQA005`) mentioned in #850. The idea to
merge the rule into `RUF100` was suggested by @MichaReiser
https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/pull/10325#issuecomment-2025535444.
## Test Plan
Test cases were added to the fixture.
## Summary
Based on discussion in #10850.
As it stands today `RUF100` will attempt to replace code redirects with
their target codes even though this is not the "goal" of `RUF100`. This
behavior is confusing and inconsistent, since code redirects which don't
otherwise violate `RUF100` will not be updated. The behavior is also
undocumented. Additionally, users who want to use `RUF100` but do not
want to update redirects have no way to opt out.
This PR explicitly detects redirects with a new rule `RUF101` and
patches `RUF100` to keep original codes in fixes and reporting.
## Test Plan
Added fixture.
## Summary
Resolves#11102
The error stems from these lines
f5c7a62aa6/crates/ruff_linter/src/noqa.rs (L697-L702)
I don't really understand the purpose of incrementing the last index,
but it makes the resulting range invalid for indexing into `contents`.
For now I just detect if the index is too high in `blanket_noqa` and
adjust it if necessary.
## Test Plan
Created fixture from issue example.
## Summary
Improve `blanket-noqa` error message in cases where codes are provided
but not detected due to formatting issues. Namely `# noqa X100` (missing
colon) or `noqa : X100` (space before colon). The behavior is similar to
`NQA002` and `NQA003` from `flake8-noqa` mentioned in #850. The idea to
merge the rules into `PGH004` was suggested by @MichaReiser
https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/pull/10325#issuecomment-2025535444.
## Test Plan
Test cases added to fixture.
## Summary
In #6157 a warning was introduced when users use `ruff: noqa`
suppression in-line instead of at the file-level. I had this trigger
today after forgetting about it, and the warning is an excellent
improvement.
I knew immediately what the issue was because I raised it previously,
but on reading the warning I'm not sure it would be so obvious to all
users. This PR extends the error with a short sentence explaining that
line-level suppression should omit the `ruff:` prefix.
## Test Plan
Not sure it's necessary for such a trivial change :)
## Summary
This PR fixes the way NoQA range is inserted to the `NoqaMapping`.
Previously, the way the mapping insertion logic worked was as follows:
1. If the range which is to be inserted _touched_ the previous range, meaning
that the end of the previous range was the same as the start of the new
range, then the new range was added in addition to the previous range.
2. Else, if the new range intersected the previous range, then the previous
range was replaced with the new _intersection_ of the two ranges.
The problem with this logic is that it does not work for the following case:
```python
assert foo, \
"""multi-line
string"""
```
Now, the comments cannot be added to the same line which ends with a continuation
character. So, the `NoQA` directive has to be added to the next line. But, the
next line is also a triple-quoted string, so the `NoQA` directive for that line
needs to be added to the next line. This creates a **union** pattern instead of an
**intersection** pattern.
But, only union doesn't suffice because (1) means that for the edge case where
the range touch only at the end, the union won't take place.
### Solution
1. Replace '<=' with '<' to have a _strict_ insertion case
2. Use union instead of intersection
## Test Plan
Add a new test case. Run the test suite to ensure that nothing is broken.
### Integration
1. Make a `test.py` file with the following contents:
```python
assert foo, \
"""multi-line
string"""
```
2. Run the following command:
```console
$ cargo run --bin ruff -- check --isolated --no-cache --select=F821 test.py
/Users/dhruv/playground/ruff/fstring.py:1:8: F821 Undefined name `foo`
Found 1 error.
```
3. Use `--add-noqa`:
```console
$ cargo run --bin ruff -- check --isolated --no-cache --select=F821 --add-noqa test.py
Added 1 noqa directive.
```
4. Check that the NoQA directive was added in the correct position:
```python
assert foo, \
"""multi-line
string""" # noqa: F821
```
5. Run the `check` command to ensure that the NoQA directive is respected:
```console
$ cargo run --bin ruff -- check --isolated --no-cache --select=F821 test.py
```
fixes: #7530
Charlie Marsh
Dhruv Manilawala
Alex
Jane Lewis
Auguste Lalande
Tony Lykke