Summary
--
Updates the rule docs to explicitly state how cases like
`Decimal("0.1")` are handled (not affected) because the discussion of
"float casts" referring to values like `nan` and `inf` is otherwise a
bit confusing.
These changes are based on suggestions from @AlexWaygood on Notion, with
a slight adjustment to use 0.1 instead of 0.5 since it causes a more
immediate issue in the REPL:
```pycon
>>> from decimal import Decimal
>>> Decimal(0.5) == Decimal("0.5")
True
>>> Decimal(0.1) == Decimal("0.1")
False
```
Test plan
--
N/a
Co-authored-by: Alex Waygood <Alex.Waygood@Gmail.com>
Summary
--
This PR updates the docs for PLW1641 to place less emphasis on the
example of inheriting a parent class's `__hash__` implementation by both
reducing the length of the example and warning that it may be unsound in
general, as @AlexWaygood pointed out on Notion.
Test plan
--
Existing tests
---------
Co-authored-by: Alex Waygood <Alex.Waygood@Gmail.com>
## Summary
Fixes https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/issues/18602 by:
1. Avoiding a fix when `*args` are present
2. Inserting the `Generic` base class right before the first keyword
argument, if one is present
In an intermediate commit, I also had special handling to avoid a fix in
the `**kwargs` case, but this is treated (roughly) as a normal keyword,
and I believe handling it properly falls out of the other keyword fix.
I also updated the `add_argument` utility function to insert new
arguments right before the keyword argument list instead of at the very
end of the argument list. This changed a couple of snapshots unrelated
to `PYI059`, but there shouldn't be any functional changes to other
rules because all other calls to `add_argument` were adding a keyword
argument anyway.
## Test Plan
Existing PYI059 cases, plus new tests based on the issue
---------
Co-authored-by: Alex Waygood <Alex.Waygood@Gmail.com>
Summary
--
Fixes#18590 by adding parentheses around lambdas and if expressions in
`for` loop iterators for FURB122 and FURB142. I also updated the docs on
the helper function to reflect the part actually being parenthesized and
the new checks.
The `lambda` case actually causes a `TypeError` at runtime, but I think
it's still worth handling to avoid causing a syntax error.
```pycon
>>> s = set()
... for x in (1,) if True else (2,):
... s.add(-x)
... for x in lambda: 0:
... s.discard(-x)
...
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "<python-input-0>", line 4, in <module>
for x in lambda: 0:
^^^^^^^^^
TypeError: 'function' object is not iterable
```
Test Plan
--
New test cases based on the bug report
---------
Co-authored-by: Dylan <dylwil3@gmail.com>
## Summary
As the title says, this PR removes the `Message::to_rule` method by
replacing related uses of `Rule` with `NoqaCode` (or the rule's name in
the case of the cache). Where it seemed a `Rule` was really needed, we
convert back to the `Rule` by parsing either the rule name (with
`str::parse`) or the `NoqaCode` (with `Rule::from_code`).
I thought this was kind of like cheating and that it might not resolve
this part of Micha's
[comment](https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/pull/18391#issuecomment-2933764275):
> because we can't add Rule to Diagnostic or **have it anywhere in our
shared rendering logic**
but after looking again, the only remaining `Rule` conversion in
rendering code is for the SARIF output format. The other two non-test
`Rule` conversions are for caching and writing a fix summary, which I
don't think fall into the shared rendering logic. That leaves the SARIF
format as the only real problem, but maybe we can delay that for now.
The motivation here is that we won't be able to store a `Rule` on the
new `Diagnostic` type, but we should be able to store a `NoqaCode`,
likely as a string.
## Test Plan
Existing tests
##
[Benchmarks](https://codspeed.io/astral-sh/ruff/branches/brent%2Fremove-to-rule)
Almost no perf regression, only -1% on
`linter/default-rules[large/dataset.py]`.
---------
Co-authored-by: Micha Reiser <micha@reiser.io>
<!--
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
/closes #18387
<!-- What's the purpose of the change? What does it do, and why? -->
## Test Plan
update snapshots
<!-- How was it tested? -->
<!--
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
https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/issues/18387#issuecomment-2923039331
<!-- What's the purpose of the change? What does it do, and why? -->
## Test Plan
update snapshots
<!-- How was it tested? -->
<!--
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
Mark `FURB180`'s fix as unsafe if the class already has base classes.
This is because the base classes might validate the other base classes
(like `typing.Protocol` does) or otherwise alter runtime behavior if
more base classes are added.
## Test Plan
The existing snapshot test covers this case already.
## References
Partially addresses https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/issues/13307 (left
out way to permit certain exceptions)
---------
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
Closes#17226.
This PR updates the `FAST003` rule to correctly handle [FastAPI class
dependencies](https://fastapi.tiangolo.com/tutorial/dependencies/classes-as-dependencies/).
Specifically, if a path parameter is declared in either:
- a `pydantic.BaseModel` used as a dependency, or
- the `__init__` method of a class used as a dependency,
then `FAST003` will no longer incorrectly report it as unused.
FastAPI allows a shortcut when using annotated class dependencies -
`Depends` can be called without arguments, e.g.:
```python
class MyParams(BaseModel):
my_id: int
@router.get("/{my_id}")
def get_id(params: Annotated[MyParams, Depends()]): ...
```
This PR ensures that such usage is properly supported by the linter.
Note: Support for dataclasses is not included in this PR. Let me know if
you’d like it to be added.
## Test Plan
Added relevant test cases to the `FAST003.py` fixture.
This PR implements template strings (t-strings) in the parser and
formatter for Ruff.
Minimal changes necessary to compile were made in other parts of the code (e.g. ty, the linter, etc.). These will be covered properly in follow-up PRs.
<!--
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? -->
Follow up on https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/pull/18093 and apply it
to AIR312
## Test Plan
<!-- How was it tested? -->
The existing test fixtures have been updated
Summary
--
This is the last main difference between the `OldDiagnostic` and
`Message`
types, so attaching a `SourceFile` to `OldDiagnostic` should make
combining the
two types almost trivial.
Initially I updated the remaining rules without access to a `Checker` to
take a
`&SourceFile` directly, but after Micha's suggestion in
https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/pull/18356#discussion_r2113281552, I
updated all of these calls to take a
`LintContext` instead. This new type is a thin wrapper around a
`RefCell<Vec<OldDiagnostic>>`
and a `SourceFile` and now has the `report_diagnostic` method returning
a `DiagnosticGuard` instead of `Checker`.
This allows the same `Drop`-based implementation to be used in cases
without a `Checker` and also avoids a lot of intermediate allocations of
`Vec<OldDiagnostic>`s.
`Checker` now also contains a `LintContext`, which it defers to for its
`report_diagnostic` methods, which I preserved for convenience.
Test Plan
--
Existing tests
<!--
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? -->
Follow up on https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/pull/18093 and apply it
to AIR311
---
Rules fixed
* `airflow.models.datasets.expand_alias_to_datasets` →
`airflow.models.asset.expand_alias_to_assets`
* `airflow.models.baseoperatorlink.BaseOperatorLink` →
`airflow.sdk.BaseOperatorLink`
## Test Plan
<!-- How was it tested? -->
The existing test fixtures have been updated
<!--
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? -->
Follow up on https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/pull/18093 and apply it
to AIR301
## Test Plan
<!-- How was it tested? -->
The existing test fixtures have been updated
<!--
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? -->
Add utility functions `generate_import_edit` and
`generate_remove_and_runtime_import_edit` to generate the fix needed for
the airflow rules.
1. `generate_import_edit` is for the cases where the member name has
changed. (e.g., `airflow.datasts.Dataset` to `airflow.sdk.Asset`) It's
just extracted from the original logic
2. `generate_remove_and_runtime_import_edit` is for cases where the
member name has not changed. (e.g.,
`airflow.operators.pig_operator.PigOperator` to
`airflow.providers.apache.pig.hooks.pig.PigCliHook`) This is newly
introduced. As it introduced runtime import, I mark it as an unsafe fix.
Under the hook, it tried to find the original import statement, remove
it, and add a new import fix
---
* rules fix
* `airflow.sensors.external_task_sensor.ExternalTaskSensorLink` →
`airflow.providers.standard.sensors.external_task.ExternalDagLink`
## Test Plan
<!-- How was it tested? -->
The existing test fixtures have been updated
Summary
--
It's a bit late in the refactoring process, but I think there are still
a couple of PRs left before getting rid of this type entirely, so I
thought it would still be worth doing.
This PR is just a quick rename with no other changes.
Test Plan
--
Existing tests
## Summary
Adds coverage of using set(...) in addition to `{...} in
SingleItemMembershipTest.
Fixes#15792
(and replaces the old PR #15793)
<!-- What's the purpose of the change? What does it do, and why? -->
## Test Plan
Updated unit test and snapshot.
Steps to reproduce are in the issue linked above.
<!-- How was it tested? -->
<!--
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#18231
<!-- What's the purpose of the change? What does it do, and why? -->
## Test Plan
Snapshot tests
<!-- How was it tested? -->
## Summary
Implements `use-maxsplit-arg` (`PLC0207`)
https://pylint.readthedocs.io/en/latest/user_guide/messages/convention/use-maxsplit-arg.html
> Emitted when accessing only the first or last element of str.split().
The first and last element can be accessed by using str.split(sep,
maxsplit=1)[0] or str.rsplit(sep, maxsplit=1)[-1] instead.
This is part of https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/issues/970
## Test Plan
`cargo test`
Additionally compared Ruff output to Pylint:
```
pylint --disable=all --enable=use-maxsplit-arg crates/ruff_linter/resources/test/fixtures/pylint/missing_maxsplit_arg.py
cargo run -p ruff -- check crates/ruff_linter/resources/test/fixtures/pylint/missing_maxsplit_arg.py --no-cache --select PLC0207
```
---------
Co-authored-by: Brent Westbrook <brentrwestbrook@gmail.com>
## Summary
This PR add the `fix safety` section for rule `B006` in
`mutable_argument_default.rs` for #15584
When applying this rule for fixes, certain changes may alter the
original logical behavior. For example:
before:
```python
def cache(x, storage=[]):
storage.append(x)
return storage
print(cache(1)) # [1]
print(cache(2)) # [1, 2]
```
after:
```python
def cache(x, storage=[]):
storage.append(x)
return storage
print(cache(1)) # [1]
print(cache(2)) # [2]
```
<!--
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#18353
<!-- What's the purpose of the change? What does it do, and why? -->
## Test Plan
<!-- How was it tested? -->
Snapshot tests
Summary
--
This PR adds a `DiagnosticGuard` type to ruff that is adapted from the
`DiagnosticGuard` and `LintDiagnosticGuard` types from ty. This guard is
returned by `Checker::report_diagnostic` and derefs to a
`ruff_diagnostics::Diagnostic` (`OldDiagnostic`), allowing methods like
`OldDiagnostic::set_fix` to be called on the result. On `Drop` the
`DiagnosticGuard` pushes its contained `OldDiagnostic` to the `Checker`.
The main motivation for this is to make a following PR adding a
`SourceFile` to each diagnostic easier. For every rule where a `Checker`
is available, this will now only require modifying
`Checker::report_diagnostic` rather than all the rules.
In the few cases where we need to create a diagnostic before we know if
we actually want to emit it, there is a `DiagnosticGuard::defuse`
method, which consumes the guard without emitting the diagnostic. I was
able to restructure about half of the rules that naively called this to
avoid calling it, but a handful of rules still need it.
One of the fairly common patterns where `defuse` was needed initially
was something like
```rust
let diagnostic = Diagnostic::new(DiagnosticKind, range);
if !checker.enabled(diagnostic.rule()) {
return;
}
```
So I also added a `Checker::checked_report_diagnostic` method that
handles this check internally. That helped to avoid some additional
`defuse` calls. The name is a bit repetitive, so I'm definitely open to
suggestions there. I included a warning against using it in the docs
since, as we've seen, the conversion from a diagnostic to a rule is
actually pretty expensive.
Test Plan
--
Existing tests
Summary
--
I thought that emitting multiple diagnostics at once would be difficult
to port to a diagnostic construction model closer to ty's
`InferContext::report_lint`, so as a first step toward that, this PR
removes `Checker::report_diagnostics`.
In many cases I was able to do some related refactoring to avoid
allocating a `Vec<Diagnostic>` at all, often by adding a `Checker` field
to a `Visitor` or by passing a `Checker` instead of a `&mut
Vec<Diagnostic>`.
In other cases, I had to fall back on something like
```rust
for diagnostic in diagnostics {
checker.report_diagnostic(diagnostic);
}
```
which I guess is a bit worse than the `extend` call in
`report_diagnostics`, but hopefully it won't make too much of a
difference.
I'm still not quite sure what to do with the remaining loop cases. The
two main use cases for collecting a sequence of diagnostics before
emitting any of them are:
1. Applying a single `Fix` to a group of diagnostics
2. Avoiding an earlier diagnostic if something goes wrong later
I was hoping we could get away with just a `DiagnosticGuard` that
reported a `Diagnostic` on drop, but I guess we will still need a
`DiagnosticGuardBuilder` that can be collected in these cases and
produce a `DiagnosticGuard` once we know we actually want the
diagnostics.
Test Plan
--
Existing tests
The PR add the `fix safety` section for rule `SIM110` (#15584 )
### Unsafe Fix Example
```python
def predicate(item):
global called
called += 1
if called == 1:
# after first call we change the method
def new_predicate(_): return False
globals()['predicate'] = new_predicate
return True
def foo():
for item in range(10):
if predicate(item):
return True
return False
def foo_gen():
return any(predicate(item) for item in range(10))
called = 0
print(foo()) # true – returns immediately on first call
called = 0
print(foo_gen()) # false – second call uses new `predicate`
```
### Note
I notice that
[here](46be305ad2/crates/ruff_linter/src/rules/flake8_simplify/rules/reimplemented_builtin.rs (L60))
we have two rules, `SIM110` & `SIM111`. The second one seems not anymore
active. Should I delete `SIM111`?
## Summary
This PR unifies the ruff `Message` enum variants for syntax errors and
rule violations into a single `Message` struct consisting of a shared
`db::Diagnostic` and some additional, optional fields used for some rule
violations.
This version of `Message` is nearly a drop-in replacement for
`ruff_diagnostics::Diagnostic`, which is the next step I have in mind
for the refactor.
I think this is also a useful checkpoint because we could possibly add
some of these optional fields to the new `Diagnostic` type. I think
we've previously discussed wanting support for `Fix`es, but the other
fields seem less relevant, so we may just need to preserve the `Message`
wrapper for a bit longer.
## Test plan
Existing tests
---------
Co-authored-by: Micha Reiser <micha@reiser.io>
<!--
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? -->
* Remove the following rules
* name
* `airflow.auth.managers.base_auth_manager.is_authorized_dataset` →
`airflow.api_fastapi.auth.managers.base_auth_manager.is_authorized_asset`
*
`airflow.providers.fab.auth_manager.fab_auth_manager.is_authorized_dataset`
→
`airflow.providers.fab.auth_manager.fab_auth_manager.is_authorized_asset`
* Update the following rules
* name
* `airflow.models.baseoperatorlink.BaseOperatorLink` →
`airflow.sdk.BaseOperatorLink`
* `airflow.api_connexion.security.requires_access` → "Use
`airflow.api_fastapi.core_api.security.requires_access_*` instead`"
* `airflow.api_connexion.security.requires_access_dataset`→
`airflow.api_fastapi.core_api.security.requires_access_asset`
* `airflow.notifications.basenotifier.BaseNotifier` →
`airflow.sdk.bases.notifier.BaseNotifier`
* `airflow.www.auth.has_access` → None
* `airflow.www.auth.has_access_dataset` → None
* `airflow.www.utils.get_sensitive_variables_fields`→ None
* `airflow.www.utils.should_hide_value_for_key`→ None
* class attribute
* `airflow..sensors.weekday.DayOfWeekSensor`
* `use_task_execution_day` removed
*
`airflow.providers.amazon.aws.auth_manager.aws_auth_manager.AwsAuthManager`
* `is_authorized_dataset`
* Add the following rules
* class attribute
* `airflow.auth.managers.base_auth_manager.BaseAuthManager` |
`airflow.providers.fab.auth_manager.fab_auth_manager.FabAuthManager`
* name
* `airflow.auth.managers.base_auth_manager.BaseAuthManager` →
`airflow.api_fastapi.auth.managers.base_auth_manager.BaseAuthManager` *
`is_authorized_dataset` → `is_authorized_asset`
* refactor
* simplify unnecessary match with if else
* rename Replacement::Name as Replacement::AttrName
## Test Plan
<!-- How was it tested? -->
The test fixtures have been revised and updated.
<!--
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? -->
In the later development of Airflow 3.0, backward compatibility was not
added for some cases. Thus, the following rules are moved back to AIR302
* airflow.hooks.subprocess.SubprocessResult →
airflow.providers.standard.hooks.subprocess.SubprocessResult
* airflow.hooks.subprocess.working_directory →
airflow.providers.standard.hooks.subprocess.working_directory
* airflow.operators.datetime.target_times_as_dates →
airflow.providers.standard.operators.datetime.target_times_as_dates
* airflow.operators.trigger_dagrun.TriggerDagRunLink →
airflow.providers.standard.operators.trigger_dagrun.TriggerDagRunLink
* airflow.sensors.external_task.ExternalTaskSensorLink →
airflow.providers.standard.sensors.external_task.ExternalDagLink (**This
one contains a minor change**)
* airflow.sensors.time_delta.WaitSensor →
airflow.providers.standard.sensors.time_delta.WaitSensor
## Test Plan
<!-- How was it tested? -->
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
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
## Summary
This PR deletes the `DiagnosticKind` type by inlining its three fields
(`name`, `body`, and `suggestion`) into three other diagnostic types:
`Diagnostic`, `DiagnosticMessage`, and `CacheMessage`.
Instead of deferring to an internal `DiagnosticKind`, both `Diagnostic`
and `DiagnosticMessage` now have their own macro-generated `AsRule`
implementations.
This should make both https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/pull/18051 and
another follow-up PR changing the type of `name` on `CacheMessage`
easier since its type will be able to change separately from
`Diagnostic` and `DiagnosticMessage`.
## Test Plan
Existing tests
The PR add the `fix safety` section for rule `SIM103` (#15584 )
### Unsafe Fix Example
```python
class Foo:
def __eq__(self, other):
return 1
def foo():
if Foo() == 1:
return True
return False
def foo_fix():
return Foo() == 1
print(foo()) # True
print(foo_fix()) # 1
```
### Note
I updated the code snippet example, because I thought it was cool to
have a correct example, i.e., that I can paste inside the playground and
it works :-)
Fixes#18069
<!--
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 PR addresses a bug in the `flake8-simplify` rule `SIM905`
(split-static-string) where `str.split(maxsplit=0)` and
`str.rsplit(maxsplit=0)` produced incorrect results for empty strings or
strings starting/ending with whitespace. The fix ensures that the
linting rule's suggested replacements now align with Python's native
behavior for these specific `maxsplit=0` scenarios.
## Test Plan
1. Added new test cases to the existing
`crates/ruff_linter/resources/test/fixtures/flake8_simplify/SIM905.py`
fixture to cover the scenarios described in issue #18069.
2. Ran `cargo test -p ruff_linter`.
3. Verified and accepted the updated snapshots for `SIM905.py` using
`cargo insta review`. The new snapshots confirm the corrected behavior
for `maxsplit=0`.
<!--
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? -->
Similiar to https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/pull/17941.
`Replacement::Name` was designed for linting only. Now, we also want to
fix the user code. It would be easier to replace it with a better
AutoImport struct whenever possible.
On the other hand, `AIR301` and `AIR311` contain attribute changes that
can still use a struct like `Replacement::Name`. To reduce the
confusion, I also updated it as `Replacement::AttrName`
Some of the original `Replacement::Name` has been replaced as
`Replacement::Message` as they're not directly mapping and the message
has now been moved to `help`
## Test Plan
<!-- How was it tested? -->
The test fixtures have been updated
The PR add the `fix safety` section for rule `RUF007` (#15584 )
It seems that the fix was always marked as unsafe #14401
## Unsafety example
This first example is a little extreme. In fact, the class `Foo`
overrides the `__getitem__` method but in a very special, way. The
difference lies in the fact that `zip(letters, letters[1:])` call the
slice `letters[1:]` which is behaving weird in this case, while
`itertools.pairwise(letters)` call just `__getitem__(0), __getitem__(1),
...` and so on.
Note that the diagnostic is emitted: [playground](https://play.ruff.rs)
I don't know if we want to mention this problem, as there is a subtile
bug in the python implementation of `Foo` which make the rule unsafe.
```python
from dataclasses import dataclass
import itertools
@dataclass
class Foo:
letters: str
def __getitem__(self, index):
return self.letters[index] + "_foo"
letters = Foo("ABCD")
zip_ = zip(letters, letters[1:])
for a, b in zip_:
print(a, b) # A_foo B, B_foo C, C_foo D, D_foo _
pair = itertools.pairwise(letters)
for a, b in pair:
print(a, b) # A_foo B_foo, B_foo C_foo, C_foo D_foo
```
This other example is much probable.
here, `itertools.pairwise` was shadowed by a costume function
[(playground)](https://play.ruff.rs)
```python
from dataclasses import dataclass
from itertools import pairwise
def pairwise(a):
return []
letters = "ABCD"
zip_ = zip(letters, letters[1:])
print([(a, b) for a, b in zip_]) # [('A', 'B'), ('B', 'C'), ('C', 'D')]
pair = pairwise(letters)
print(pair) # []
```
<!--
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
Fixes#17599.
## Test Plan
Snapshot tests.
---------
Co-authored-by: Brent Westbrook <36778786+ntBre@users.noreply.github.com>
<!--
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? -->
If a try-catch block guards the names, we don't raise warnings. During
this change, I discovered that some of the replacement types were
missed. Thus, I extend the fix to types other than AutoImport as well
## Test Plan
<!-- How was it tested? -->
Test fixtures are added and updated.
<!--
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? -->
The existing implementation of RUF060 (InEmptyCollection) is not
recursive, meaning that although set([]) results in an empty collection,
the existing code fails it because set is taking an argument.
The updated implementation allows set and frozenset to take empty
collection as positional argument (which results in empty
set/frozenset).
## Test Plan
Added test cases for recursive cases + updated snapshot (see RUF060.py).
---------
Co-authored-by: Marcus Näslund <marcus.naslund@kognity.com>
<!--
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? -->
Fixes#17776.
This PR also handles all other `PTH*` rules that don't support file
descriptors.
## Test Plan
<!-- How was it tested? -->
Update existing tests.
<!--
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
We can only guarantee the safety of the autofix for number literals, all
other cases may change the runtime behaviour of the program or introduce
a syntax error. For the cases reported in the issue that would result in
a syntax error, I disabled the autofix.
Follow-up of #17661.
Fixes#16472.
<!-- 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? -->
* `airflow.models.Connection` → `airflow.sdk.Connection`
* `airflow.models.Variable` → `airflow.sdk.Variable`
## Test Plan
<!-- How was it tested? -->
The test fixtures has been updated (see the first commit for easier
review)
## Summary
This PR partially addresses #16418 via the following:
- `LinterSettings::unresolved_python_version` is now a `TargetVersion`,
which is a thin wrapper around an `Option<PythonVersion>`
- `Checker::target_version` now calls `TargetVersion::linter_version`
internally, which in turn uses `unwrap_or_default` to preserve the
current default behavior
- Calls to the parser now call `TargetVersion::parser_version`, which
calls `unwrap_or_else(PythonVersion::latest)`
- The `Checker`'s implementation of
`SemanticSyntaxContext::python_version` also uses
`TargetVersion::parser_version` to use `PythonVersion::latest` for
semantic errors
In short, all lint rule behavior should be unchanged, but we default to
the latest Python version for the new syntax errors, which should
minimize confusing version-related syntax errors for users without a
version configured.
## Test Plan
Existing tests, which showed no changes (except for printing default
settings).
## Summary
Introducing a new rule based on discussions in #15732 and #15729 that
checks for unnecessary in with empty collections.
I called it in_empty_collection and gave the rule number RUF060.
Rule is in preview group.
The PR add the fix safety section for rule `RUF013`
(https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/issues/15584 )
The fix was introduced here #4831
The rule as a lot of False Negative (as it is explained in the docs of
the rule).
The main reason because the fix is unsafe is that it could change code
generation tools behaviour, as in the example here:
```python
def generate_api_docs(func):
hints = get_type_hints(func)
for param, hint in hints.items():
if is_optional_type(hint):
print(f"Parameter '{param}' is optional")
else:
print(f"Parameter '{param}' is required")
# Before fix
def create_user(name: str, roles: list[str] = None):
pass
# After fix
def create_user(name: str, roles: Optional[list[str]] = None):
pass
# Generated docs would change from "roles is required" to "roles is optional"
```
When attempting to determine whether `import foo.bar.baz` is a known
first-party import relative to [user-provided source
paths](https://docs.astral.sh/ruff/settings/#src), when `preview` is
enabled we now check that `SRC/foo/bar/baz` is a directory or
`SRC/foo/bar/baz.py` or `SRC/foo/bar/baz.pyi` exist.
Previously, we just checked the analogous thing for `SRC/foo`, but this
can be misleading in situations with disjoint namespace packages that
share a common base name (e.g. we may be working inside the namespace
package `foo.buzz` and importing `foo.bar` from elsewhere).
Supersedes #12987Closes#12984
<!--
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
Fixes#17798
<!-- 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? -->
Skip attribute check in try catch block (`AIR301`)
## Test Plan
<!-- How was it tested? -->
update
`crates/ruff_linter/resources/test/fixtures/airflow/AIR301_names_try.py`
<!--
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? -->
Remove `airflow.utils.dag_parsing_context.get_parsing_context` from
AIR301 as it has been moved to AIR311
## Test Plan
<!-- How was it tested? -->
the test fixture was updated in the previous PR
## Summary
Contains the same changes to the semantic type inference as
https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/pull/17705.
Fixes#17694
<!-- What's the purpose of the change? What does it do, and why? -->
## Test Plan
<!-- How was it tested? -->
Snapshot tests.
---------
Co-authored-by: Dhruv Manilawala <dhruvmanila@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Brent Westbrook <brentrwestbrook@gmail.com>
## Summary
<!-- What's the purpose of the change? What does it do, and why? -->
This is not yet fixing anything as the names are not changed, but it
lays down the foundation for fixing.
## Test Plan
<!-- How was it tested? -->
the existing test fixture should already cover this change
## Summary
Includes minor changes to the semantic type inference to help detect the
return type of function call.
Fixes#17691
## Test Plan
Snapshot tests
## Summary
<!-- What's the purpose of the change? What does it do, and why? -->
Apply auto fixes to cases where the names have changed in Airflow 3 in
AIR302 and split the huge test cases into different test cases based on
proivder
## Test Plan
<!-- How was it tested? -->
the test cases has been split into multiple for easier checking
Summary
--
This PR resolves https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/issues/9761 by adding
a linter configuration option to disable
`typing_extensions` imports. As mentioned [here], it would be ideal if
we could
detect whether or not `typing_extensions` is available as a dependency
automatically, but this seems like a much easier fix in the meantime.
The default for the new option, `typing-extensions`, is `true`,
preserving the current behavior. Setting it to `false` will bail out of
the new
`Checker::typing_importer` method, which has been refactored from the
`Checker::import_from_typing` method in
https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/pull/17340),
with `None`, which is then handled specially by each rule that calls it.
I considered some alternatives to a config option, such as checking if
`typing_extensions` has been imported or checking for a `TYPE_CHECKING`
block we could use, but I think defaulting to allowing
`typing_extensions` imports and allowing the user to disable this with
an option is both simple to implement and pretty intuitive.
[here]:
https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/issues/9761#issuecomment-2790492853
Test Plan
--
New linter tests exercising several combinations of Python versions and
the new config option for PYI019. I also added tests for the other
affected rules, but only in the case where the new config option is
enabled. The rules' existing tests also cover the default case.
This PR promotes the fix applicability of [readlines-in-for
(FURB129)](https://docs.astral.sh/ruff/rules/readlines-in-for/#readlines-in-for-furb129)
to always safe.
In the original PR (https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/pull/9880), the
author marked the rule as unsafe because Ruff's type inference couldn't
quite guarantee that we had an `IOBase` object in hand. Some false
positives were recorded in the test fixture. However, before the PR was
merged, Charlie added the necessary type inference and the false
positives went away.
According to the [Python
documentation](https://docs.python.org/3/library/io.html#io.IOBase), I
believe this fix is safe for any proper implementation of `IOBase`:
>[IOBase](https://docs.python.org/3/library/io.html#io.IOBase) (and its
subclasses) supports the iterator protocol, meaning that an
[IOBase](https://docs.python.org/3/library/io.html#io.IOBase) object can
be iterated over yielding the lines in a stream. Lines are defined
slightly differently depending on whether the stream is a binary stream
(yielding bytes), or a text stream (yielding character strings). See
[readline()](https://docs.python.org/3/library/io.html#io.IOBase.readline)
below.
and then in the [documentation for
`readlines`](https://docs.python.org/3/library/io.html#io.IOBase.readlines):
>Read and return a list of lines from the stream. hint can be specified
to control the number of lines read: no more lines will be read if the
total size (in bytes/characters) of all lines so far exceeds hint. [...]
>Note that it’s already possible to iterate on file objects using for
line in file: ... without calling file.readlines().
I believe that a careful reading of our [versioning
policy](https://docs.astral.sh/ruff/versioning/#version-changes)
requires that this change be deferred to a minor release - but please
correct me if I'm wrong!
This PR collects all behavior gated under preview into a new module
`ruff_linter::preview` that exposes functions like
`is_my_new_feature_enabled` - just as is done in the formatter crate.
The PR add the `fix safety` section for rule `RUF027` (#15584 ).
Actually, I have an example of a false positive. Should I include it in
the` fix safety` section?
---------
Co-authored-by: Dylan <dylwil3@gmail.com>
The PR add the fix safety section for rule `FLY002` (#15584 )
The motivation for the content of the fix safety section is given by the
following example
```python
foo = 1
bar = [2, 3]
try:
result_join = " ".join((foo, bar))
print(f"Join result: {result_join}")
except TypeError as e:
print(f"Join error: {e}")
```
which print `Join error: sequence item 0: expected str instance, int
found`
But after the fix is applied, we have
```python
foo = 1
bar = [2, 3]
try:
result_join = f"{foo} {bar}"
print(f"Join result: {result_join}")
except TypeError as e:
print(f"Join error: {e}")
```
which print `Join result: 1 [2, 3]`
---------
Co-authored-by: dylwil3 <dylwil3@gmail.com>
## Summary
This PR add the `fix safety` section for rule `ASYNC116` in
`long_sleep_not_forever.rs` for #15584
---------
Co-authored-by: dylwil3 <dylwil3@gmail.com>
## Summary
<!-- What's the purpose of the change? What does it do, and why? -->
Add "airflow.operators.python.get_current_context" →
"airflow.sdk.get_current_context" rule
## Test Plan
<!-- How was it tested? -->
the test fixture has been updated accordingly
## Summary
Even though the original suggestion works, they've been removed in later
version and is no longer the best practices.
e.g., many sql realted operators have been removed and are now suggested
to use SQLExecuteQueryOperator instead
## Test Plan
The existing test fixtures have been updated
Summary
--
While going through the syntax errors in [this comment], I was surprised
to see the error `name 'x' is assigned to before global declaration`,
which corresponds to [load-before-global-declaration (PLE0118)] and has
also been reimplemented as a syntax error (#17135). However, it looks
like neither of the implementations consider `global` declarations in
the top-level module scope, which is a syntax error in CPython:
```python
# try.py
x = None
global x
```
```shell
> python -m compileall -f try.py
Compiling 'try.py'...
*** File "try.py", line 2
global x
^^^^^^^^
SyntaxError: name 'x' is assigned to before global declaration
```
I'm not sure this is the best or most elegant solution, but it was a
quick fix that passed all of our tests.
Test Plan
--
New PLE0118 test case.
[this comment]:
https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/issues/7633#issuecomment-1740424031
[load-before-global-declaration (PLE0118)]:
https://docs.astral.sh/ruff/rules/load-before-global-declaration/#load-before-global-declaration-ple0118
## Summary
Apply auto fixes to cases where the names have changed in Airflow 3
## Test Plan
Add `AIR301_names_fix.py` and `AIR301_provider_names_fix.py` test fixtures
This pull request fixes https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/issues/17014
changes this
```python
from __future__ import annotations
flag1 = True
flag2 = True
if flag1 == True or flag2 == True:
pass
if flag1 == False and flag2 == False:
pass
flag3 = True
if flag1 == flag3 and (flag2 == False or flag3 == True): # Should become: if flag1==flag3 and (not flag2 or flag3)
pass
if flag1 == True and (flag2 == False or not flag3 == True): # Should become: if flag1 and (not flag2 or not flag3)
pass
if flag1 != True and (flag2 != False or not flag3 == True): # Should become: if not flag1 and (flag2 or not flag3)
pass
flag = True
while flag == True: # Should become: while flag
flag = False
flag = True
x = 5
if flag == True and x > 0: # Should become: if flag and x > 0
print("ok")
flag = True
result = "yes" if flag == True else "no" # Should become: result = "yes" if flag else "no"
x = flag == True < 5
x = (flag == True) == False < 5
```
to this
```python
from __future__ import annotations
flag1 = True
flag2 = True
if flag1 or flag2:
pass
if not flag1 and not flag2:
pass
flag3 = True
if flag1 == flag3 and (not flag2 or flag3): # Should become: if flag1 == flag3 and (not flag2 or flag3)
pass
if flag1 and (not flag2 or not flag3): # Should become: if flag1 and (not flag2 or not flag3)
pass
if not flag1 and (flag2 or not flag3): # Should become: if not flag1 and (flag2 or not flag3)
pass
flag = True
while flag: # Should become: while flag
flag = False
flag = True
x = 5
if flag and x > 0: # Should become: if flag and x > 0
print("ok")
flag = True
result = "yes" if flag else "no" # Should become: result = "yes" if flag else "no"
x = flag is True < 5
x = (flag) is False < 5
```
---------
Co-authored-by: Brent Westbrook <36778786+ntBre@users.noreply.github.com>
This is an implementation of the discussion from #16719.
This change will allow list function calls to be replaced with
comprehensions:
```python
result = list()
for i in range(3):
result.append(i + 1)
# becomes
result = [i + 1 for i in range(3)]
```
I added a new test to `PERF401.py` to verify that this fix will now work
for `list()`.
## Summary
add fix safety section to replace_stdout_stderr and
super_call_with_parameters, for #15584
I checked the behavior and found that these two files could only
potentially delete the appended comments, so I submitted them as a PR.
The PR fixes#16457 .
Specifically, `FURB161` is marked safe, but the rule generates safe
fixes only in specific cases. Therefore, we attempt to mark the fix as
unsafe when we are not in one of these cases.
For instances, the fix is marked as aunsafe just in case of strings (as
pointed out in the issue). Let me know if I should change something.
---------
Co-authored-by: Brent Westbrook <brentrwestbrook@gmail.com>
## Summary
This change adds an auto-fix for manual dict comprehensions. It also
copies many of the improvements from #13919 (and associated PRs fixing
issues with it), and moves some of the utility functions from
`manual_list_comprehension.rs` into a separate `helpers.rs` to be used
in both.
## Test Plan
I added a preview test case to showcase the new fix and added a test
case in `PERF403.py` to make sure lines with semicolons function. I
didn't yet make similar tests to the ones I added earlier to
`PERF401.py`, but the logic is the same, so it might be good to add
those to make sure they work.
add fix safety section to docs for #15584, I'm new to ruff and not sure
if the content of this PR is correct, but I hope it can be helpful.
---------
Co-authored-by: Brent Westbrook <brentrwestbrook@gmail.com>
<!--
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? -->
* Extend the following AIR311 rules
* `airflow.io.path.ObjectStoragePath` → `airflow.sdk.ObjectStoragePath`
* `airflow.io.storage.attach` → `airflow.sdk.io.attach`
* `airflow.models.dag.DAG` → `airflow.sdk.DAG`
* `airflow.models.DAG` → `airflow.sdk.DAG`
* `airflow.decorators.dag` → `airflow.sdk.dag`
* `airflow.decorators.task` → `airflow.sdk.task`
* `airflow.decorators.task_group` → `airflow.sdk.task_group`
* `airflow.decorators.setup` → `airflow.sdk.setup`
* `airflow.decorators.teardown` → `airflow.sdk.teardown`
## Test Plan
<!-- How was it tested? -->
The test case has been added to the button of the existing test
fixtures, confirmed to be correct and later reorgnaized
<!--
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? -->
As discussed in
https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/issues/14626#issuecomment-2766146129,
we're to separate suggested changes from required changes.
The following symbols have been moved to AIR311 from AIR301. They still
work in Airflow 3.0, but they're suggested to be changed as they're
expected to be removed in a future version.
* arguments
* `airflow..DAG | dag`
* `sla_miss_callback`
* operators
* `sla`
* name
* `airflow.Dataset] | [airflow.datasets.Dataset` → `airflow.sdk.Asset`
* `airflow.datasets, rest @ ..`
* `DatasetAlias` → `airflow.sdk.AssetAlias`
* `DatasetAll` → `airflow.sdk.AssetAll`
* `DatasetAny` → `airflow.sdk.AssetAny`
* `expand_alias_to_datasets` → `airflow.sdk.expand_alias_to_assets`
* `metadata.Metadata` → `airflow.sdk.Metadata`
<!--airflow.models.baseoperator-->
* `airflow.models.baseoperator.chain` → `airflow.sdk.chain`
* `airflow.models.baseoperator.chain_linear` →
`airflow.sdk.chain_linear`
* `airflow.models.baseoperator.cross_downstream` →
`airflow.sdk.cross_downstream`
* `airflow.models.baseoperatorlink.BaseOperatorLink` →
`airflow.sdk.definitions.baseoperatorlink.BaseOperatorLink`
* `airflow.timetables, rest @ ..`
* `datasets.DatasetOrTimeSchedule` → *
`airflow.timetables.assets.AssetOrTimeSchedule`
* `airflow.utils, rest @ ..`
<!--airflow.utils.dag_parsing_context-->
* `dag_parsing_context.get_parsing_context` →
`airflow.sdk.get_parsing_context`
## Test Plan
<!-- How was it tested? -->
The test fixture has been updated acccordingly
Summary
--
This PR implements detecting the use of `await` expressions outside of
async functions. This is a reimplementation of
[await-outside-async
(PLE1142)](https://docs.astral.sh/ruff/rules/await-outside-async/) as a
semantic syntax error.
Despite the rule name, PLE1142 also applies to `async for` and `async
with`, so these are covered here too.
Test Plan
--
Existing PLE1142 tests.
I also deleted more code from the `SemanticSyntaxCheckerVisitor` to
avoid changes in other parser tests.
Summary
--
This PR reimplements [yield-outside-function
(F704)](https://docs.astral.sh/ruff/rules/yield-outside-function/) as a
semantic syntax error. Despite the name, this rule covers `yield from`
and `await` in addition to `yield`.
Test Plan
--
New linter tests, along with the existing F704 test.
---------
Co-authored-by: Dhruv Manilawala <dhruvmanila@gmail.com>
Summary
--
This PR replaces uses of version-dependent imports from `typing` or
`typing_extensions` with a centralized `Checker::import_from_typing`
method.
The idea here is to make the fix for #9761 (whatever it ends up being)
applicable to all of the rules performing similar checks.
Test Plan
--
Existing tests for the affected rules.
## Summary
There is a new official URL for the typing documentation:
https://typing.python.org/
Change all https://typing.readthedocs.io/ links to use the new sub
domain, which is slightly shorter and looks more official.
## Test Plan
Tested to see if each and every new URL is accessible. I noticed that
some links go to https://typing.python.org/en/latest/source/stubs.html
which seems to be outdated, but that is a separate issue. The same page
shows up for the old URL.
## Summary
Based on the discussion in
https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/pull/17298#discussion_r2033975460, we
decided to move the scope handling out of the `SemanticSyntaxChecker`
and into the `SemanticSyntaxContext` trait. This PR implements that
refactor by:
- Reverting all of the `Checkpoint` and `in_async_context` code in the
`SemanticSyntaxChecker`
- Adding four new methods to the `SemanticSyntaxContext` trait
- `in_async_context`: matches `SemanticModel::in_async_context` and only
detects the nearest enclosing function
- `in_sync_comprehension`: uses the new `is_async` tracking on
`Generator` scopes to detect any enclosing sync comprehension
- `in_module_scope`: reports whether we're at the top-level scope
- `in_notebook`: reports whether we're in a Jupyter notebook
- In-lining the `TestContext` directly into the
`SemanticSyntaxCheckerVisitor`
- This allows modifying the context as the visitor traverses the AST,
which wasn't possible before
One potential question here is "why not add a single method returning a
`Scope` or `Scopes` to the context?" The main reason is that the `Scope`
type is defined in the `ruff_python_semantic` crate, which is not
currently a dependency of the parser. It also doesn't appear to be used
in red-knot. So it seemed best to use these more granular methods
instead of trying to access `Scope` in `ruff_python_parser` (and
red-knot).
## Test Plan
Existing parser and linter tests.
<!--
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? -->
attribute check was missing in the previous implementation
e.g.
```python
from airflow.api.auth.backend import basic_auth
basic_auth.auth_current_user
```
This PR adds this kind of check.
## Test Plan
<!-- How was it tested? -->
The test case has been added to the button of the existing test
fixtures, confirmed to be correct and later reorgnaized
<!--
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? -->
* Simplify match conditions in AIR301
* Fix
* `airflow.datasets.manager.DatasetManager` →
`airflow.assets.manager.AssetManager`
* `airflow.www.auth.has_access_dataset` →
`airflow.www.auth.has_access_dataset`
## Test Plan
<!-- How was it tested? -->
The test fixture has been updated accordingly
<!--
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? -->
As discussed in
https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/issues/14626#issuecomment-2766146129,
we're to separate suggested changes from required changes.
The following symbols has been moved to AIR312 from AIR302. They still
work in Airflow 3.0, but they're suggested to be changed as they're
expected to be removed in future version
```python
from airflow.hooks.filesystem import FSHook
from airflow.hooks.package_index import PackageIndexHook
from airflow.hooks.subprocess import (SubprocessHook, SubprocessResult, working_directory)
from airflow.operators.bash import BashOperator
from airflow.operators.datetime import BranchDateTimeOperator, target_times_as_dates
from airflow.operators.trigger_dagrun import TriggerDagRunLink, TriggerDagRunOperator
from airflow.operators.empty import EmptyOperator
from airflow.operators.latest_only import LatestOnlyOperator
from airflow.operators.python import (BranchPythonOperator, PythonOperator, PythonVirtualenvOperator, ShortCircuitOperator)
from airflow.operators.weekday import BranchDayOfWeekOperator
from airflow.sensors.date_time import DateTimeSensor, DateTimeSensorAsync
from airflow.sensors.external_task import ExternalTaskMarker, ExternalTaskSensor, ExternalTaskSensorLink
from airflow.sensors.filesystem import FileSensor
from airflow.sensors.time_sensor import TimeSensor, TimeSensorAsync
from airflow.sensors.time_delta import TimeDeltaSensor, TimeDeltaSensorAsync, WaitSensor
from airflow.sensors.weekday import DayOfWeekSensor
from airflow.triggers.external_task import DagStateTrigger, WorkflowTrigger
from airflow.triggers.file import FileTrigger
from airflow.triggers.temporal import DateTimeTrigger, TimeDeltaTrigger
```
## Test Plan
<!-- How was it tested? -->
The test fixture has been updated acccordingly
---------
Co-authored-by: Brent Westbrook <36778786+ntBre@users.noreply.github.com>
This fix closes#16868
I noticed the issue is assigned, but the assignee appears to be actively
working on another pull request. I hope that’s okay!
<!--
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? -->
As of Python 3.11.1, `enum.auto()` can be used in multiple assignments.
This pattern should not trigger non-unique-enums check.
Reference: [Python docs on
enum.auto()](https://docs.python.org/3/library/enum.html#enum.auto)
This fix updates the check logic to skip enum variant statements where
the right-hand side is a tuple containing a call to `enum.auto()`.
## Test Plan
<!-- How was it tested? -->
The added test case uses the example from the original issue. It
previously triggered a false positive, but now passes successfully.
## Summary
### Improvement
Expand the following moved module into individual symbols.
* airflow.triggers.temporal
* airflow.triggers.file
* airflow.triggers.external_task
* airflow.hooks.subprocess
* airflow.hooks.package_index
* airflow.hooks.filesystem
* airflow.sensors.weekday
* airflow.sensors.time_delta
* airflow.sensors.time_sensor
* airflow.sensors.date_time
* airflow.operators.weekday
* airflow.operators.datetime
* airflow.operators.bash
This removes `Replacement::ImportPathMoved`.
## Fix
During the expansion, the following paths were also fixed
* airflow.sensors.s3_key_sensor.S3KeySensor →
airflow.providers.amazon.aws.sensors.S3KeySensor
* airflow.operators.sql.SQLThresholdCheckOperator →
airflow.providers.common.sql.operators.sql.SQLThresholdCheckOperator
* airflow.hooks.druid_hook.DruidDbApiHook →
airflow.providers.apache.druid.hooks.druid.DruidDbApiHook
* airflow.hooks.druid_hook.DruidHook →
airflow.providers.apache.druid.hooks.druid.DruidHook
* airflow.kubernetes.pod_generator.extend_object_field →
airflow.providers.cncf.kubernetes.pod_generator.extend_object_field
* airflow.kubernetes.pod_launcher.PodLauncher →
airflow.providers.cncf.kubernetes.pod_launcher_deprecated.PodLauncher
* airflow.kubernetes.pod_launcher.PodStatus →
airflow.providers.cncf.kubernetes.pod_launcher_deprecated.PodStatus
* airflow.kubernetes.pod_generator.PodDefaults →
airflow.providers.cncf.kubernetes.pod_generator.PodDefaults
* airflow.kubernetes.pod_launcher_deprecated.PodDefaults →
airflow.providers.cncf.kubernetes.pod_launcher_deprecated.PodDefaults
### Refactor
As many symbols are moved into the same module,
`SourceModuleMovedToProvider` is introduced for grouping similar logic
## Test Plan
This fix closes#17026
## Summary
The check for the `PytestRaisesTooBroad` rule is now skipped if there is
a second positional argument present, which means `pytest.raises` is
used as a function.
## Test Plan
Tested on the example from the issue, which now passes the check.
```Python3
pytest.raises(Exception, func, *func_args, **func_kwargs).match("error message")
```
---------
Co-authored-by: Micha Reiser <micha@reiser.io>
Closes#17042
## Summary
This PR fixes the issue outlined in #17042 where RUF100 (unused-noqa)
fails to detect unused file-level noqa directives (`# ruff: noqa` or `#
ruff: noqa: {code}`).
The issue stems from two underlying causes:
1. For blanket file-level directives (`# ruff: noqa`), there's a
circular dependency: the directive exempts all rules including RUF100
itself, which prevents checking for usage. This isn't changed by this
PR. I would argue it is intendend behavior - a blanket `# ruff: noqa`
directive should exempt all rules including RUF100 itself.
2. For code-specific file-level directives (e.g. `# ruff: noqa: F841`),
the handling was missing in the `check_noqa` function. This is added in
this PR.
## Notes
- For file-level directives, the `matches` array is pre-populated with
the specified codes during parsing, unlike line-level directives which
only populate their `matches` array when actually suppressing
diagnostics. This difference requires the somewhat clunky handling of
both cases. I would appreciate guidance on a cleaner design :)
- A more fundamental solution would be to change how file-level
directives initialize the `matches` array in
`FileNoqaDirectives::extract()`, but that requires more substantial
changes as it breaks existing functionality. I suspect discussions in
#16483 are relevant for this.
## Test Plan
- Local verification
- Added a test case and fixture
## Summary
Some of the migration rules has been changed during Airflow 3
development. The following are new AIR302 rules. Corresponding AIR301
has also been removed.
* airflow.sensors.external_task_sensor.ExternalTaskMarker →
airflow.providers.standard.sensors.external_task.ExternalTaskMarker
* airflow.sensors.external_task_sensor.ExternalTaskSensor →
airflow.providers.standard.sensors.external_task.ExternalTaskSensor
* airflow.sensors.external_task_sensor.ExternalTaskSensorLink →
airflow.providers.standard.sensors.external_task.ExternalTaskSensorLink
* airflow.sensors.time_delta_sensor.TimeDeltaSensor →
airflow.providers.standard.sensors.time_delta.TimeDeltaSensor
* airflow.operators.dagrun_operator.TriggerDagRunLink →
airflow.providers.standard.operators.trigger_dagrun.TriggerDagRunLink
* airflow.operators.dagrun_operator.TriggerDagRunOperator →
airflow.providers.standard.operators.trigger_dagrun.TriggerDagRunOperator
* airflow.operators.python_operator.BranchPythonOperator →
airflow.providers.standard.operators.python.BranchPythonOperator
* airflow.operators.python_operator.PythonOperator →
airflow.providers.standard.operators.python.PythonOperator
* airflow.operators.python_operator.PythonVirtualenvOperator →
airflow.providers.standard.operators.python.PythonVirtualenvOperator
* airflow.operators.python_operator.ShortCircuitOperator →
airflow.providers.standard.operators.python.ShortCircuitOperator
* airflow.operators.latest_only_operator.LatestOnlyOperator →
airflow.providers.standard.operators.latest_only.LatestOnlyOperator
* airflow.sensors.date_time_sensor.DateTimeSensor →
airflow.providers.standard.sensors.DateTimeSensor
* airflow.operators.email_operator.EmailOperator →
airflow.providers.smtp.operators.smtp.EmailOperator
* airflow.operators.email.EmailOperator →
airflow.providers.smtp.operators.smtp.EmailOperator
* airflow.operators.bash.BashOperator →
airflow.providers.standard.operators.bash.BashOperator
* airflow.operators.EmptyOperator →
airflow.providers.standard.operators.empty.EmptyOperator
closes: https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/issues/17103
## Test Plan
The test fixture has been updated and checked after each change and
later reorganized in the latest commit
Fixes: #17196
## Summary
Skipping these nodes for malformed type expressions would lead to
incorrect semantic state, which can in turn mean we emit false positives
for rules like `unused-variable`(`F841`)
## Test Plan
`cargo nextest run`
<!--
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?
-->
Closes#17084
## Summary
This PR adds a new rule (RUF102) to detect and fix invalid rule codes in
`noqa` comments.
Invalid rule codes in `noqa` directives serve no purpose and may
indicate outdated code suppressions.
This extends the previous behaviour originating from
`crates/ruff_linter/src/noqa.rs` which would only emit a warnigs.
With this rule a `--fix` is available.
The rule:
1. Analyzes all `noqa` directives to identify invalid rule codes
2. Provides autofix functionality to:
- Remove the entire comment if all codes are invalid
- Remove only the invalid codes when mixed with valid codes
3. Preserves original comment formatting and whitespace where possible
Example cases:
- `# noqa: XYZ111` → Remove entire comment (keep empty line)
- `# noqa: XYZ222, XYZ333` → Remove entire comment (keep empty line)
- `# noqa: F401, INVALID123` → Keep only valid codes (`# noqa: F401`)
## Test Plan
- Added tests in
`crates/ruff_linter/resources/test/fixtures/ruff/RUF102.py` covering
different example cases.
<!-- How was it tested? -->
## Notes
- This does not handle cases where parsing fails. E.g. `# noqa:
NON_EXISTENT, ANOTHER_INVALID` causes a `LexicalError` and the
diagnostic is not propagated and we cannot handle the diagnostic. I am
also unsure what proper `fix` handling would be and making the user
aware we don't understand the codes is probably the best bet.
- The rule is added to the Preview rule group as it's a new addition
## Questions
- Should we remove the warnings, now that we have a rule?
- Is the current fix behavior appropriate for all cases, particularly
the handling of whitespace and line deletions?
- I'm new to the codebase; let me know if there are rule utilities which
could have used but didn't.
---------
Co-authored-by: Micha Reiser <micha@reiser.io>
<!--
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 decided to disable the new
[`needless_continue`](https://rust-lang.github.io/rust-clippy/master/index.html#needless_continue)
rule because I often found the explicit `continue` more readable over an
empty block or having to invert the condition of an other branch.
## Test Plan
`cargo test`
---------
Co-authored-by: Alex Waygood <Alex.Waygood@Gmail.com>
We add support for `return` and `raise` statements in the control flow
graph: we simply add an edge to the terminal block, push the statements
to the current block, and proceed.
This implementation will have to be modified somewhat once we add
support for `try` statements - then we will need to check whether to
_defer_ the jump. But for now this will do!
Also in this PR: We fix the `unreachable` diagnostic range so that it
lumps together consecutive unreachable blocks.
## Summary
Following up the discussion in
https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/issues/14626#issuecomment-2766548545,
we're to reorganize airflow rules. Before this discussion happens, we
combine required changes and suggested changes in to one single error
code.
This PR first rename the original error code to the new error code as we
discussed. We will gradually extract suggested changes out of AIR301 and
AIR302 to AIR311 and AIR312 in the following PRs
## Test Plan
Except for file, error code rename, the test case should work as it used
to be.
## Summary
Add autofix infrastructure to `AIR302` name checks and use this logic to
fix`"airflow", "api_connexion", "security", "requires_access_dataset"`, `"airflow", "Dataset"` and `"airflow",
"datasets", "Dataset"`
## Test Plan
The existing test fixture reflects the update
## Summary
Closes#17112. Allows passing in string and list-of-strings literals
into `subprocess.run` (and related) calls without marking them as
untrusted input:
```py
import subprocess
subprocess.run("true")
# "instant" named expressions are also allowed
subprocess.run(c := "ls")
```
## Test Plan
Added test cases covering new behavior, passed with `cargo nextest run`.
## Summary
* ``airflow.auth.managers.base_auth_manager.is_authorized_dataset`` has
been moved to
``airflow.api_fastapi.auth.managers.base_auth_manager.is_authorized_asset``
in Airflow 3.0
* ``airflow.auth.managers.models.resource_details.DatasetDetails`` has
been moved to
``airflow.api_fastapi.auth.managers.models.resource_details.AssetDetails``
in Airflow 3.0
* Dag arguments `default_view` and `orientation` has been removed in
Airflow 3.0
* `airflow.models.baseoperatorlink.BaseOperatorLink` has been moved to
`airflow.sdk.definitions.baseoperatorlink.BaseOperatorLink` in Airflow
3.0
* ``airflow.notifications.basenotifier.BaseNotifier`` has been moved to
``airflow.sdk.BaseNotifier`` in Airflow 3.0
* ``airflow.utils.log.secrets_masker`` has been moved to
``airflow.sdk.execution_time.secrets_masker`` in Airflow 3.0
* ``airflow...DAG.allow_future_exec_dates`` has been removed in Airflow
3.0
* `airflow.utils.db.create_session` has een removed in Airflow 3.0
* `airflow.sensors.base_sensor_operator.BaseSensorOperator` has been
moved to `airflow.sdk.bases.sensor.BaseSensorOperator` removed Airflow
3.0
* `airflow.utils.file.TemporaryDirectory` has been removed in Airflow
3.0 and can be replaced by `tempfile.TemporaryDirectory`
* `airflow.utils.file.mkdirs` has been removed in Airflow 3.0 and can be
replaced by `pathlib.Path({path}).mkdir`
## Test Plan
Test fixture has been added for these changes
## Summary
Unlike other AIR3XX rules, this best practice can be applied to Airflow
1 and Airflow 2 as well. Thus, we think it might make sense for use to
move it to AIR002 so that the first number of the error align to Airflow
version as possible to reduce confusion
## Test Plan
the test fixture has been updated
Summary
--
This PR reimplements
[load-before-global-declaration
(PLE0118)](https://docs.astral.sh/ruff/rules/load-before-global-declaration/)
as a semantic syntax error.
I added a `global` method to the `SemanticSyntaxContext` trait to make
this very easy, at least in ruff. Does red-knot have something similar?
If this approach will also work in red-knot, I think some of the other
PLE rules are also compile-time errors in CPython, PLE0117 in
particular. 0115 and 0116 also mention `SyntaxError`s in their docs, but
I haven't confirmed them in the REPL yet.
Test Plan
--
Existing linter tests for PLE0118. I think this actually can't be tested
very easily in an inline test because the `TestContext` doesn't have a
real way to track globals.
---------
Co-authored-by: Micha Reiser <micha@reiser.io>
## Summary
Adds import `numpy.typing as npt` to `default in
flake8-import-conventions.aliases`
Resolves#17028
## Test Plan
Manually ran local ruff on the altered fixture and also ran `cargo test`
## Summary
I don't remember exactly when we made `Identifier` a node but it is now
considered a node (it implements `AnyNodeRef`, it has a range). However,
we never updated
the `SourceOrderVisitor` to visit identifiers because we never had a use
case for it and visiting new nodes can change how the formatter
associates comments (breaking change!).
This PR updates the `SourceOrderVisitor` to visit identifiers and
changes the formatter comment visitor to skip identifiers (updating the
visitor might be desired because it could help simplifying some comment
placement logic but this is out of scope for this PR).
## Test Plan
Tests, updated snapshot tests
This PR contains the scaffolding for a new control flow graph
implementation, along with its application to the `unreachable` rule. At
the moment, the implementation is a maximal over-approximation: no
control flow is modeled and all statements are counted as reachable.
With each additional statement type we support, this approximation will
improve.
So this PR just contains:
- A `ControlFlowGraph` struct and builder
- Support for printing the flow graph as a Mermaid graph
- Snapshot tests for the actual graphs
- (a very bad!) reimplementation of `unreachable` using the new structs
- Snapshot tests for `unreachable`
# Instructions for Viewing Mermaid snapshots
Unfortunately I don't know how to convince GitHub to render the Mermaid
graphs in the snapshots. However, you can view these locally in VSCode
if you install an extension that supports Mermaid graphs in Markdown,
and then add this to your `settings.json`:
```json
"files.associations": {
"*.md.snap": "markdown",
}
```
<!--
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? -->
* Combine AIR302 matches
* Found a few errors. Will be fixed in another PR
## Test Plan
<!-- How was it tested? -->
This PR does not change anything. The existing testing fixture should
work as it used to be
<!--
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? -->
* The following paths are wrong
* `airflow.providers.amazon.auth_manager.avp.entities` should be
`airflow.providers.amazon.aws.auth_manager.avp.entities`
* `["airflow", "datasets", "manager", "dataset_manager"]` should be
fixed as `airflow.assets.manager` but not
`airflow.assets.manager.asset_manager`
* `["airflow", "datasets.manager", "DatasetManager"]` should be `
["airflow", "datasets", "manager", "DatasetManager"]` instead
## Test Plan
<!-- How was it tested? -->
the test fixture is updated accordingly
<!--
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? -->
Improve AIR302 test cases
## Test Plan
<!-- How was it tested? -->
test fixtures have been updated accordingly
<!--
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? -->
combine similar case condition in AIR302
## Test Plan
<!-- How was it tested? -->
nothing should be changed. existing test case should already cover it
## Summary
Here I fix the last English spelling errors I could find in the repo.
Again, I am trying not to touch variable/function names, or anything
that might be misspelled in the API. The goal is to make this PR safe
and easy to merge.
## Test Plan
I have run all the unit tests. Though, again, all of the changes I make
here are to docs and docstrings. I make no code changes, which I believe
should greatly mitigate the testing concerns.
<!--
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 is a cleanup PR. I am fixing various English language spelling
errors. This is mostly in docs and docstrings.
## Test Plan
The usual CI tests were run. I tried to build the docs (though I had
some troubles there). The testing needs here are, I trust, very low
impact. (Though I would happily test more.)
I am one of the core developers of Airflow and working on the
"airflow.sdk"
package, and this updates the recommended replacments to the correct
user-facing imports.[^1]
cc @Lee-W @uranusjr
[^1]:
33f0f1d639/task-sdk/src/airflow/sdk/__init__.py (L68-L93)
<!--
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? -->
## Test Plan
Hope and pray? 😉
I'm sure there are some snapshot files I'm supposed to fix first.
<!-- How was it tested? -->
## Summary
This change follows up on the bug-fix requested in #16747 --
`ruff_python_ast::OperatorPrecedence` had an enum variant, `BitXorOr`,
which which gave the same precedence to the `|` and `^` operators. This
goes against [Python's documentation for operator
precedence](https://docs.python.org/3/reference/expressions.html#operator-precedence),
so this PR changes the code so that it's correct.
This is part of the overall effort to unify redundant definitions of
`OperatorPrecedence` throughout the codebase (#16071)
## Test Plan
Because this is an internal change, I only ran existing tests to ensure
nothing was broken.
Summary
--
This PR updates `check_path` in the `ruff_linter` crate to return a
`Vec<Message>` instead of a `Vec<Diagnostic>`. The main motivation for
this is to make it easier to convert semantic syntax errors directly
into `Message`s rather than `Diagnostic`s in #16106. However, this also
has the benefit of keeping the preview check on unsupported syntax
errors in `check_path`, as suggested in
https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/pull/16429#discussion_r1974748024.
All of the interesting changes are in the first commit. The second
commit just renames variables like `diagnostics` to `messages`, and the
third commit is a tiny import fix.
I also updated the `ExpandedMessage::location` field name, which caused
a few extra commits tidying up the playground code. I thought it was
nicely symmetric with `end_location`, but I'm happy to revert that too.
Test Plan
--
Existing tests. I also tested the playground and server manually.
## Summary
Stop flagging each invocation of `django.utils.safestring.mark_safe`
(also available at, `django.utils.html.mark_safe`) as an error.
Instead, allow string literals as valid uses for `mark_safe`.
Also, update the documentation, pointing at
`django.utils.html.format_html` for dynamic content generation use
cases.
Closes#16702
## Test Plan
I verified several possible uses, but string literals, are still
flagged.
---------
Co-authored-by: Micha Reiser <micha@reiser.io>
## Summary
This PR stabilizes the behavior introduced in
https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/pull/15985
The new behavior improves the inference of `str.strip` calls:
* before: The rule only considered calls on string or byte literals
(`"abcd".strip`)
* now: The rule also catches calls to `strip` on object where the type
is known to be a `str` or `bytes` (e.g. `a = "abc"; a.strip("//")`)
The new behavior shipped as part of Ruff 0.9.6 on the 10th of Feb which
is a little more than a month ago.
There have been now new issues or PRs related to the new behavior.
## Summary
This PR promotes the fix improvements for `PLR1714` that were introduced
in https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/pull/14372/ to stable.
The improvement is that the fix now proposes to use a set if all
elements are hashable:
```
foo == "bar" or foo == "baz" or foo == "qux"
```
Gets fixed to
```py
foo in {"bar", "baz", "qux"}
```
where it previously always got fixed to a tuple.
The new fix was first released in ruff 0.8.0 (Nov last year). This is
not a breaking change. The change was preview gated only to get some
extra test coverage.
There are no open issues or PRs related to this changed fix behavior.
## Summary
This PR stabilizes the behavior changes introduced by
https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/pull/13305 that were gated behind
preview.
The change is that `__new__` methods are now no longer flagged by
`invalid-first-argument-name-for-class-method` (`N804`) but instead by
`bad-staticmethod-argument` (`PLW0211`)
> __new__ methods are technically static methods, with cls as their
first argument. However, Ruff currently classifies them as classmethod,
which causes two issues:
## Test Plan
There have been no new issues or PRs related to `N804` or `PLW0211`
since the behavior change was released in Ruff 0.9.7 (about 3 weeks
ago).
This is a somewhat recent change but I don't think it's necessary to
leave this in preview for another 2 months. The main reason why it was
in preview
is that it is breaking, not because it is a risky change.
## Summary
This PR stabilizes the fix for `PYI018` introduced in
https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/pull/15999/ (first released with Ruff
0.9.5 early February)
There are no known issues with the fix or open PRs.
## Summary
Deprecate `S320` because defusedxml has deprecated there `lxml` module
and `lxml` has been hardened since.
flake8-bandit has removed their implementation as well
(https://github.com/PyCQA/bandit/pull/1212).
Addresses https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/issues/13707
## Test Plan
I verified that selecting `S320` prints a warning and fails if the
preview mode is enabled.
## Summary
This PR stabilizes the fixes improvements made in
https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/pull/15562 (released with ruff 0.9.3
in mid January).
There's no open issue or PR related to the changed fix behavior.
This is not a breaking change. The fix was only gated behind preview to
get some more test coverage before releasing.
## Summary
This PR stabilizes the behavior change introduced in
https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/pull/15872/
The diagnostic range is now the range of the redundant `mode` argument
where it previously was the range of the entire `open` call:
Before:
```
UP015.py:2:1: UP015 [*] Unnecessary mode argument
|
1 | open("foo", "U")
2 | open("foo", "Ur")
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ UP015
3 | open("foo", "Ub")
4 | open("foo", "rUb")
|
= help: Remove mode argument
```
Now:
```
UP015.py:2:13: UP015 [*] Unnecessary mode argument
|
1 | open("foo", "U")
2 | open("foo", "Ur")
| ^^^^ UP015
3 | open("foo", "Ub")
4 | open("foo", "rUb")
|
= help: Remove mode argument
```
This is a breaking change because it may require moving a `noqa` comment
onto a different line, e.g if you have
```py
open(
"foo",
"Ur",
) # noqa: UP015
```
Needs to be rewritten to
```py
open(
"foo",
"Ur", # noqa: UP015
)
```
There have been now new issues or PRs since the new preview behavior was
implemented. It first was released as part of Ruff 0.9.5 on the 5th of
Feb (a little more than a month ago)
## Test Plan
I reviewed the snapshot tests
## Summary
This PR stabilizes the preview behavior introduced in
https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/pull/15719 to recognize all symbols
named `TYPE_CHECKING` as type-checking
checks in `if TYPE_CHECKING` conditions. This ensures compatibility with
mypy and pyright.
This PR also stabilizes the new behavior that removes `if 0:` and `if
False` to be no longer considered type checking blocks.
Since then, this syntax has been removed from the typing spec and was
only used for Python modules that don't have a `typing` module
([comment](https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/pull/15719#issuecomment-2612787793)).
The preview behavior was first released with Ruff 0.9.5 (6th of
February), which was about a month ago. There are no open issues or PRs
for the changed behavior
## Test Plan
The snapshots for `SIM108` change because `SIM108` ignored type checking
blocks but it can no
simplify `if 0` or `if False` blocks again because they're no longer
considered type checking blocks.
The changes in the `TC005` snapshot or only due to that `if 0` and `if
False` are no longer recognized as type checking blocks
<!-- How was it tested? -->
## Summary
This PR stabilizes the preview behavior for `invalid-argument-name`
(`N803`)
to ignore argument names of functions decorated with `typing.override`
because
these methods are *out of the authors* control.
This behavior was introduced in
https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/pull/15954
and released as part of Ruff 0.9.5 (6th of February).
There have been no new issues or PRs since this behavior change
(preview) was introduced.
## Summary
This PR stabilizes the preview behavior introduced in
https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/pull/15905
The behavior change is that the rule now also recognizes `type(expr) is
type(None)` comparisons where `expr` isn't a name expression.
For example, the rule now detects `type(a.b) is type(None)` and suggests
rewriting the comparison to `a.b is None`.
The new behavior was introduced with Ruff 0.9.5 (6th of February), about
a month ago. There are no open issues or PRs related to this rule (or
behavior change).
## Summary
This PR stabilizes the new behavior introduced in
https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/pull/14512 to also detect defalut
value arguemnts to `os.environ.get` that have an invalid type (not
`str`).
There's an upstream issue for this behavior change
https://github.com/pylint-dev/pylint/issues/10092 that was accepted and
a PR, but it hasn't been merged yet.
This behavior change was first shipped with Ruff 0.8.1 (Nov 22).
There has only be one PR since the new behavior was introduced but it
was unrelated to the scope increase
(https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/pull/14841).
## Summary
This PR stabilizes the behavior change introduced in
https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/pull/15542 to allow
for statements with an empty body in `pytest.raises` and `pytest.warns`
with statements.
This raised an error before but is now allowed:
```py
with pytest.raises(KeyError, match='unknown'):
async for _ in gpt.generate(gpt_request):
pass
```
The same applies to
```py
with pytest.raises(KeyError, match='unknown'):
async for _ in gpt.generate(gpt_request):
...
```
There have been now new issues or PRs related to PT012 or PT031 since
this behavior change was introduced in ruff 0.9.3 (January 23rd).
## Summary
This PR deprecates UP038. Using PEP 604 syntax in `isinstance` and
`issubclass` calls isn't a recommended pattern (or community agreed best
practice)
and it negatively impacts performance.
Resolves https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/issues/7871
## Test Plan
I tested that selecting `UP038` results in a warning in no-preview mode
and an error in preview mode
Summary
--
Stabilizes S704, which is also being recoded from RUF035 in 0.10.
Test Plan
--
Existing tests with `PreviewMode` removed from the settings.
There was one issue closed on 2024-12-20 calling the rule noisy and
asking for a config option, but the option was added and then there were
no more issues or PRs.
Summary
--
Stabilizes DTZ901, renames the rule function to match the rule name,
removes the `preview_rules` test, and handles some nits in the docs
(mention `min` first to match the rule name too).
Test Plan
--
1 closed issue on 2024-11-12, 4 days after the rule was added. No issues
since
Summary
--
Stabilizes RUF048 and moves its test to the right place. The docs look
good.
Test Plan
--
0 closed or open issues. There was 1 [PR] related to an extension to the
rule, but it was closed without comment.
[PR]: https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/pull/14701
Summary
--
Stabilizes RUF046 and moves its test to the right place. The docs look
good.
Test Plan
--
2 closed newline/whitespace issues from early January and 1 closed issue
about really being multiple rules, but otherwise no recent issues or
PRs.
# Summary
The goal of this PR is to address various issues around parsing
suppression comments by
1. Unifying the logic used to parse in-line (`# noqa`) and file-level
(`# ruff: noqa`) noqa comments
2. Recovering from certain errors and surfacing warnings in these cases
Closes#15682
Supersedes #12811
Addresses
https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/pull/14229#discussion_r1835481018
Related: #14229 , #12809
## Summary
This PR changes the default value of
`lint.flake8-builtins.builtins-strict-checking` added in
https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/pull/15951 from `true` to `false`.
This also allows simplifying the default option logic and removes the
dependence on preview mode.
https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/issues/15399 was already closed by
#15951, but this change will finalize the behavior mentioned in
https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/issues/15399#issuecomment-2587017147.
As an example, strict checking flags modules based on their last
component, so `utils/logging.py` triggers A005. Non-strict checking
checks the path to the module, so `utils/logging.py` is allowed (this is
the example and desired behavior from #15399 exactly) but a top-level
`logging.py` or `logging/__init__.py` is still disallowed.
## Test Plan
Existing tests from #15951 and #16006, with the snapshot updated in
`a005_module_shadowing_strict_default` to reflect the new default.
Summary
--
Stabilizes UP044, renames the module to match the rule name, and removes
the `PreviewMode` from the test settings.
Test Plan
--
2 closed issues in November, just after the rule was added, otherwise no
issues
Summary
--
Stabilizes SIM905 and adds a small addition to the docs. The test was
already in the right place.
Test Plan
--
No issues except 2 recent, general issues about whitespace
normalization.
## Summary
This PR stabilizes several preview-only behaviours for
`custom-typevar-for-self` (`PYI019`). Namely:
- A new, more accurate technique is now employed for detecting custom
TypeVars that are replaceable with `Self`. See
https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/pull/15888 for details.
- The range of the diagnostic is now the full function header rather
than just the return annotation. (Previously, the rule only applied to
methods with return annotations, but this is no longer true due to the
changes in the first bullet point.)
- The fix is now available even when preview mode is not enabled.
## Test Plan
- Existing snapshots that do not have preview mode enabled are updated
- Preview-specific snapshots are removed
- I'll check the ecosystem report on this PR to verify everything's as
expected
Summary
--
Stabilizes PLC1802. The tests were already in the right place, and I
just tidied the docs a little bit.
Test Plan
--
1 issue closed 4 days after the rule was added, no other issues
Summary
--
Stabilizes PLW1507. The tests were already in the right place, and I
just tidied the docs a little bit.
Test Plan
--
1 issue from 2 weeks ago but just suggesting to mark the fix unsafe. The
shallow vs deep copy *does* change the program behavior, just usually in
a preferable way.
## Summary
Resolves#15368.
The following options have been renamed:
* `builtins-allowed-modules` → `allowed-modules`
* `builtins-ignorelist` → `ignorelist`
* `builtins-strict-checking` → `strict-checking`
To preserve compatibility, the old names are kept as Serde aliases.
## Test Plan
`cargo nextest run` and `cargo insta test`.
---------
Co-authored-by: Micha Reiser <micha@reiser.io>
## Summary
`RUF035` has been backported into bandit as `S704` in this
[PR](https://github.com/PyCQA/bandit/pull/1225)
This moves the rule and its corresponding setting to the `flake8-bandit`
category
## Test Plan
`cargo nextest run`
---------
Co-authored-by: Micha Reiser <micha@reiser.io>
## Summary
This came up in https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/issues/16477
It's not obvious from the D417 rule's documentation that it only checks
docstrings
with an arguments section. Functions without such a section aren't
checked.
This PR tries to make this clearer in the documentation.
## Summary
Resolves#16445.
`UP028` is now no longer always fixable: it will not offer a fix when at
least one `ExprName` target is bound to either a `global` or a
`nonlocal` declaration.
## Test Plan
`cargo nextest run` and `cargo insta test`.
The PR addresses issue #16396 .
Specifically:
- If the exit statement contains a code keyword argument, it is
converted into a positional argument.
- If retrieving the code from the exit statement is not possible, a
violation is raised without suggesting a fix.
---------
Co-authored-by: Brent Westbrook <36778786+ntBre@users.noreply.github.com>
Split from F841 following discussion in #8884.
Fixes#8884.
<!--
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? -->
Add a new rule for unused assignments in tuples. Remove similar behavior
from F841.
## Test Plan
Adapt F841 tests and move them over to the new rule.
<!-- How was it tested? -->
---------
Co-authored-by: Micha Reiser <micha@reiser.io>
## Summary
Resolves#16374.
`PLW0177` now also reports the pattern of a case branch if it is an
attribute access whose qualified name is that of either `np.nan` or
`math.nan`.
As the rule is in preview, the changes are not preview-gated.
## Test Plan
`cargo nextest run` and `cargo insta test`.
## Summary
This PR builds on the changes in #16220 to pass a target Python version
to the parser. It also adds the `Parser::unsupported_syntax_errors` field, which
collects version-related syntax errors while parsing. These syntax
errors are then turned into `Message`s in ruff (in preview mode).
This PR only detects one syntax error (`match` statement before Python
3.10), but it has been pretty quick to extend to several other simple
errors (see #16308 for example).
## Test Plan
The current tests are CLI tests in the linter crate, but these could be
supplemented with inline parser tests after #16357.
I also tested the display of these syntax errors in VS Code:
---------
Co-authored-by: Alex Waygood <alex.waygood@gmail.com>
I am working on a project that uses ruff linters' docs to generate a
fine-tuning dataset for LLMs.
To achieve this, I first ran the command `ruff rule --all
--output-format json` to retrieve all the rules. Then, I parsed the
explanation field to get these 3 consistent sections:
- `Why is this bad?`
- `What it does`
- `Example`
However, during the initial processing, I noticed that the markdown
headings are not that consistent. For instance:
- In most cases, `Use instead` appears as a normal paragraph within the
`Example` section, but in the file
`crates/ruff_linter/src/rules/flake8_bandit/rules/django_extra.rs` it is
a level-2 heading
- The heading "What it does**?**" is used in some places, while others
consistently use "What it does"
- There are 831 `Example` headings and 65 `Examples`. But all of them
only have one example case
This PR normalized these across all rules.
## Test Plan
CI are passed.
## Summary
This PR is another step in preparing to detect syntax errors in the
parser. It introduces the new `per-file-target-version` top-level
configuration option, which holds a mapping of compiled glob patterns to
Python versions. I intend to use the
`LinterSettings::resolve_target_version` method here to pass to the
parser:
f50849aeef/crates/ruff_linter/src/linter.rs (L491-L493)
## Test Plan
I added two new CLI tests to show that the `per-file-target-version` is
respected in both the formatter and the linter.
## Summary
* Existing example did not include RawSQL() call like it should
* Also clarify the example a bit to make it clearer that the code is not
secure
## Test Plan
N/A, only documentation updated
## Summary
Resolves 3/4 requests in #16217:
- ✅ Remove not special methods: `__cmp__`, `__div__`, `__nonzero__`, and
`__unicode__`.
- ✅ Add special methods: `__next__`, `__buffer__`, `__class_getitem__`,
`__mro_entries__`, `__release_buffer__`, and `__subclasshook__`.
- ✅ Support positional-only arguments.
- ❌ Add support for module functions `__dir__` and `__getattr__`. As
mentioned in the issue the check is scoped for methods rather than
module functions. I am hesitant to expand the scope of this check
without a discussion.
## Test Plan
- Manually confirmed each example file from the issue functioned as
expected.
- Ran cargo nextest to ensure `unexpected_special_method_signature` test
still passed.
Fixes#16217.
## Summary
Move class attribute (property, methods, variables) related cases in
AIR302_names to AIR302_class_attribute
## Test Plan
No functionality change. Test fixture is reogranized
Fixes false negative when slice bound uses length of string literal.
We were meant to check the following, for example. Given:
```python
text[:bound] if text.endswith(suffix) else text
```
We want to know whether:
- `suffix` is a string literal and `bound` is a number literal
- `suffix` is an expression and `bound` is
exactly `-len(suffix)` (as AST nodes, prior to evaluation.)
The issue is that negative number literals like `-10` are stored as
unary operators applied to a number literal in the AST. So when `suffix`
was a string literal but `bound` was `-len(suffix)` we were getting
caught in the match arm where `bound` needed to be a number. This is now
fixed with a guard.
Closes#16231
## Summary
This PR updates the formatter and linter to use the `PythonVersion`
struct from the `ruff_python_ast` crate internally. While this doesn't
remove the need for the `linter::PythonVersion` enum, it does remove the
`formatter::PythonVersion` enum and limits the use in the linter to
deserializing from CLI arguments and config files and moves most of the
remaining methods to the `ast::PythonVersion` struct.
## Test Plan
Existing tests, with some inputs and outputs updated to reflect the new
(de)serialization format. I think these are test-specific and shouldn't
affect any external (de)serialization.
---------
Co-authored-by: Alex Waygood <Alex.Waygood@Gmail.com>
## Summary
Separate ImportPathMoved and ProviderName to avoid misusing (AIR303)
## Test Plan
only code arrangement is updated. existing test fixture should be not be
changed
## Summary
This PR makes the following changes:
- It adjusts various callsites to use the new
`ast::StringLiteral::contents_range()` method that was introduced in
https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/pull/16183. This is less verbose and
more type-safe than using the `ast::str::raw_contents()` helper
function.
- It adds a new `ast::ExprStringLiteral::as_unconcatenated_literal()`
helper method, and adjusts various callsites to use it. This addresses
@MichaReiser's review comment at
https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/pull/16183#discussion_r1957334365.
There is no functional change here, but it helps readability to make it
clearer that we're differentiating between implicitly concatenated
strings and unconcatenated strings at various points.
- It renames the `StringLiteralValue::flags()` method to
`StringLiteralFlags::first_literal_flags()`. If you're dealing with an
implicitly concatenated string `string_node`,
`string_node.value.flags().closer_len()` could give an incorrect result;
this renaming makes it clearer that the `StringLiteralFlags` instance
returned by the method is only guaranteed to give accurate information
for the first `StringLiteral` contained in the `ExprStringLiteral` node.
- It deletes the unused `BytesLiteralValue::flags()` method. This seems
prone to misuse in the same way as `StringLiteralValue::flags()`: if
it's an implicitly concatenated bytestring, the `BytesLiteralFlags`
instance returned by the method would only give accurate information for
the first `BytesLiteral` in the bytestring.
## Test Plan
`cargo test`
## Summary
Fixes#16189.
Only `sys.breakpointhook` is flagged by the upstream linter:
007a745c86/pylint/checkers/stdlib.py (L38)
but I think it makes sense to flag
[`__breakpointhook__`](https://docs.python.org/3/library/sys.html#sys.__breakpointhook__)
too, as suggested in the issue because it
> contain[s] the original value of breakpointhook [...] in case [it
happens] to get replaced with broken or alternative objects.
## Test Plan
New T100 test cases
## Summary
Provides documentation about the FIPS compliant flag for Python hashlib
`usedforsecurity`
Fixes#16188
## Test Plan
* pre-commit hooks
---------
Co-authored-by: Brent Westbrook <36778786+ntBre@users.noreply.github.com>
chiri
Brent Westbrook
Dylan
Charlie Marsh
Victorien
Robsdedude
Denys Kyslytsyn
Wei Lee
Marcus Näslund
Victor Hugo Gomes
vjurczenia
Hans
Viktor Merkurev
Max Mynter
हिमांशु
Vasanth
Vasco Schiavo
Dragon
Micha Reiser
Dan Parizher
Dimitri Papadopoulos Orfanos
Yunchi Pang
omahs
jie211
camper42
Navdeep K
David Salvisberg
w0nder1ng
David Peter
trag1c
Mohammad Amin Ghasemi
Aarni Koskela
renovate[bot]
John Stilley
Daniel Wilton
Ash Berlin-Taylor
Junhson Jean-Baptiste
Kaxil Naik
Mauro Fontana
Alex Waygood
InSync
Jelle Zijlstra
Adam Johnson
Carl Meyer
Muspi Merol
Ari Pollak
Darius Carrier
sobolevn
cake-monotone
Aaron Gokaslan