My editor runs `rustfmt` on save to format Rust code, not `cargo fmt`.
With our recent bump to the Rust 2024 edition, the formatting that
`rustfmt`/`cargo fmt` applies changed. Unfortunately, `rustfmt` and
`cargo fmt` have different behaviors for determining which edition to
use when formatting: `cargo fmt` looks for the Rust edition in
`Cargo.toml`, whereas `rustfmt` looks for it in `rustfmt.toml`. As a
result, whenever I save, I have to remember to manually run `cargo fmt`
before committing/pushing.
There is an open issue asking for `rustfmt` to also look at `Cargo.toml`
when it's present (https://github.com/rust-lang/rust.vim/issues/368),
but it seems like they "closed" that issue just by bumping the default
edition (six years ago, from 2015 to 2018).
In the meantime, this PR adds a `rustfmt.toml` file with our current
Rust edition so that both invocation have the same behavior. I don't
love that this duplicates information in `Cargo.toml`, but I've added a
reminder comment there to hopefully ensure that we bump the edition in
both places three years from now.
## Summary
Support direct uses of `typing.TypeAliasType`, as in:
```py
from typing import TypeAliasType
IntOrStr = TypeAliasType("IntOrStr", int | str)
def f(x: IntOrStr) -> None:
reveal_type(x) # revealed: int | str
```
closes https://github.com/astral-sh/ty/issues/392
## Ecosystem
The new false positive here:
```diff
+ error[invalid-type-form] altair/utils/core.py:49:53: The first argument to `Callable` must be either a list of types, ParamSpec, Concatenate, or `...`
```
comes from the fact that we infer the second argument as a type
expression now. We silence false positives for PEP695 `ParamSpec`s, but
not for `P = ParamSpec("P")` inside `Callable[P, ...]`.
## Test Plan
New Markdown tests
## Summary
just a minor nit followup to
https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/pull/18010 -- put all the
non-`Visitor` methods of `SemanticIndexBuilder` in the same impl block
rather than having multiple impl blocks
## Test Plan
`cargo build`
Summary
--
I noticed these `cfg` directives while working on diagnostics. I think
it makes more sense to apply an `insta` filter in the test instead. I
copied this filter from a CLI test for the same rule.
Test Plan
--
Existing tests, especially Windows CI on this PR
## Summary
With this PR we now detect that x is always defined in `use`:
```py
if flag and (x := number):
use(x)
```
When outside if, it's still detected as possibly not defined
```py
flag and (x := number)
# error: [possibly-unresolved-reference]
use(x)
```
In order to achieve that, I had to find a way to get access to the
flow-snapshots of the boolean expression when analyzing the flow of the
if statement. I did it by special casing the visitor of boolean
expression to return flow control information, exporting two snapshots -
`maybe_short_circuit` and `no_short_circuit`. When indexing
boolean expression itself we must assume all possible flows, but when
it's inside if statement, we can be smarter than that.
## Test Plan
Fixed existing and added new mdtests.
I went through some of mypy primer results and they look fine
---------
Co-authored-by: Carl Meyer <carl@astral.sh>
## Summary
Add various attributes to `NamedTuple` classes/instances that are
available at runtime.
closes https://github.com/astral-sh/ty/issues/417
## Test Plan
New Markdown tests
The PR add the `fix safety` section for rule `SIM210` (#15584 )
It is a little cheating, as the Fix safety section is copy/pasted by
#18086 as the problem is the same.
### Unsafe Fix Example
```python
class Foo():
def __eq__(self, other):
return 0
def foo():
return True if Foo() == 0 else False
def foo_fix():
return Foo() == 0
print(foo()) # False
print(foo_fix()) # 0
```
<!--
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#18107
<!-- What's the purpose of the change? What does it do, and why? -->
## Test Plan
Snapshot tests
<!-- How was it tested? -->
<!--
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
<!-- What's the purpose of the change? What does it do, and why? -->
`ProviderReplacement::Name` was designed back when we only wanted to do
linting. Now we also want to fix the user code. It would be easier for
us to replace them with better AutoImport struct.
## Test Plan
<!-- How was it tested? -->
The test fixture has been updated as some cases can now be fixed
Douglas Creager
Micha Reiser
David Peter
renovate[bot]
Dragon
Alex Waygood
Chandra Kiran G
Carl Meyer
Matthew Mckee
Brent Westbrook
TomerBin
Vasco Schiavo
Victor Hugo Gomes
Wei Lee