<!--
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
I've also found another bug while fixing this, where the diagnostic
would not trigger if the `len` call argument variable was shadowed. This
fixed a few false negatives in the test cases.
Example:
```python
fruits = []
fruits = []
if len(fruits): # comment
...
```
Fixes#18811Fixes#18812
<!-- What's the purpose of the change? What does it do, and why? -->
## Test Plan
Add regression test
<!-- How was it tested? -->
---------
Co-authored-by: Charlie Marsh <crmarsh416@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
Fix `PYI041`'s fix turning `None | int | None | float` into `None | None
| float`, which raises a `TypeError` when executed.
The fix consists of making sure that the merged super-type is inserted
where the first type that is merged was before.
## Test Plan
Tests have been expanded with examples from the issue.
## Related Issue
Fixes https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/issues/18298
<!--
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 https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/issues/18726 by also checking if
its a literal and not only that it is truthy. See also the first comment
in the issue.
It would have been nice to check for inheritance of BaseException but I
figured that is not possible yet...
## Test Plan
I added a few tests for valid input to exc_info
## Summary
Ignore `__init__.py` files in `useless-import-alias` (PLC0414).
See discussion in #18365 and #6294: we want to allow redundant aliases
in `__init__.py` files, as they're almost always intentional explicit
re-exports.
Closes#18365Closes#6294
---------
Co-authored-by: Dylan <dylwil3@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
I also noticed that the tests for SIM911 were note being run, so I fixed
that.
Fixes#18777
<!-- What's the purpose of the change? What does it do, and why? -->
## Test Plan
Add regression test
<!-- How was it tested? -->
## Summary
Fixes false positives (and incorrect autofixes) in `nested-min-max`
(`PLW3301`) when the outer `min`/`max` call only has a single argument.
Previously the rule would flatten:
```python
min(min([2, 3], [4, 1]))
```
into `min([2, 3], [4, 1])`, changing the semantics. The rule now skips
any nested call when the outer call has only one positional argument.
The pylint fixture and snapshot were updated accordingly.
## Test Plan
Ran Ruff against the updated `nested_min_max.py` fixture:
```shell
cargo run -p ruff -- check crates/ruff_linter/resources/test/fixtures/pylint/nested_min_max.py --no-cache --select=PLW3301 --preview
```
to verify that `min(min([2, 3], [4, 1]))` and `max(max([2, 4], [3, 1]))`
are no longer flagged. Updated the fixture and snapshot; all other
existing warnings remain unchanged. The code compiles and the unit tests
pass.
---
This PR was generated by an AI system in collaboration with maintainers:
@carljm, @ntBre
Fixes#16163
---------
Signed-off-by: Gene Parmesan Thomas <201852096+gopoto@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Brent Westbrook <brentrwestbrook@gmail.com>
Added `cls.__dict__.get('__annotations__')` check for Python 3.10+ and
Python < 3.10 with `typing-extensions` enabled.
Closes#17853
<!--
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
Added `cls.__dict__.get('__annotations__')` check for Python 3.10+ and
Python < 3.10 with `typing-extensions` enabled.
## Test Plan
`cargo test`
---------
Co-authored-by: Brent Westbrook <36778786+ntBre@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Micha Reiser <micha@reiser.io>
Essentially this PR ensures that when we do fixes like this:
```diff
- t"{set(f(x) for x in foo)}"
+ t"{ {f(x) for x in foo} }"
```
we are correctly adding whitespace around the braces.
This logic is already in place for f-strings and just needed to be
generalized to interpolated strings.
<!--
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#18684
<!-- What's the purpose of the change? What does it do, and why? -->
## Test Plan
Add regression test
<!-- 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
/closes #18639
<!-- What's the purpose of the change? What does it do, and why? -->
## Test Plan
update snapshots
<!-- How was it tested? -->
---------
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?
-->
This PR aims to close#16605.
## Summary
This PR introduces a new rule (`RUF061`) that detects non-contextmanager
usage of `pytest.raises`, `pytest.warns`, and `pytest.deprecated_call`.
This pattern is discouraged and [was proposed in
flake8-pytest-style](https://github.com/m-burst/flake8-pytest-style/pull/332),
but the corresponding PR has been open for over a month without
activity.
Additionally, this PR provides an unsafe fix for simple cases where the
non-contextmanager form can be transformed into the context manager
form. Examples of supported patterns are listed in `RUF061_raises.py`,
`RUF061_warns.py`, and `RUF061_deprecated_call.py` test files.
The more complex case from the original issue (involving two separate
statements):
```python
excinfo = pytest.raises(ValueError, int, "hello")
assert excinfo.match("^invalid literal")
```
is getting fixed like this:
```python
with pytest.raises(ValueError) as excinfo:
int("hello")
assert excinfo.match("^invalid literal")
```
Putting match in the raises call requires multi-statement
transformation, which I am not sure how to implement.
## Test Plan
<!-- How was it tested? -->
New test files were added to cover various usages of the
non-contextmanager form of pytest.raises, warns, and deprecated_call.
<!--
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? -->
Solves #18257
## Test Plan
<!-- How was it tested? -->
Snapshots updated with some cases (negative, positive, mixed
annotations).
## Summary
Fixes https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/issues/18628 by avoiding a fix
if there are "unknown" arguments, including any keyword arguments and
more than the expected 2 positional arguments.
I'm a bit on the fence here because it also seems reasonable to avoid a
diagnostic at all. Especially in the final test case I added (`not
my_dict.get(default=False)`), the hint suggesting to remove
`default=False` seems pretty misleading. At the same time, I guess the
diagnostic at least calls attention to the call site, which could help
to fix the missing argument bug too.
As I commented on the issue, I double-checked that keyword arguments are
invalid as far back as Python 3.8, even though the positional-only
marker was only added to the
[docs](https://docs.python.org/3.11/library/stdtypes.html#dict.get) in
3.12 (link is to 3.11, showing its absence).
## Test Plan
New tests derived from the bug report
## Stabilization
This was planned to be stabilized in 0.12, and the bug is less severe
than some others, but if there's nobody opposed, I will plan **not to
stabilize** this one for now.
<!--
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 false positive in B909 (`loop-iterator-mutation`) where mutations
inside return/break statements were incorrectly flagged as violations.
The fix adds tracking for when mutations occur within return/break
statements and excludes them from violation detection, as they don't
cause the iteration issues B909 is designed to prevent.
## Test Plan
- Added test cases covering the reported false positive scenarios to
`B909.py`
- Verified existing B909 tests continue to pass (no regressions)
- Ran `cargo test -p ruff_linter --lib flake8_bugbear` successfully
Fixes#18399
## Summary
Fixes https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/issues/18612 by:
- Bailing out without a fix in the case of `*args`, which I don't think
we can fix reliably
- Using an `Edit::deletion` from `remove_argument` instead of an
`Edit::range_replacement` in the presence of unrecognized keyword
arguments
I thought we could always switch to the `Edit::deletion` approach
initially, but it caused problems when `maxlen` was passed positionally,
which we didn't have any existing tests for.
The replacement fix can easily delete comments, so I also marked the fix
unsafe in these cases and updated the docs accordingly.
## Test Plan
New test cases derived from the issue.
## Stabilization
These are pretty significant changes, much like those to PYI059 in
https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/pull/18611 (and based a bit on the
implementation there!), so I think it probably makes sense to
un-stabilize this for the 0.12 release, but I'm open to other thoughts
there.
## 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>
<!--
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
<!--
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
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>
<!--
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
<!--
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? -->
<!--
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? -->
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
<!--
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
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.
<!--
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?
-->
Re: #17526
## Summary
Add test fixtures for `AwaitOutsideAsync` and
`AsyncComprehensionOutsideAsyncFunction` errors.
<!-- What's the purpose of the change? What does it do, and why? -->
## Test Plan
This is a test.
<!-- 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
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`
## 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
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
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!
## 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 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()`.
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.
<!--
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>
<!--
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? -->
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
--
Detect async comprehensions nested in sync comprehensions in async
functions before Python 3.11, when this was [changed].
The actual logic of this rule is very straightforward, but properly
tracking the async scopes took a bit of work. An alternative to the
current approach is to offload the `in_async_context` check into the
`SemanticSyntaxContext` trait, but that actually required much more
extensive changes to the `TestContext` and also to ruff's semantic
model, as you can see in the changes up to
31554b473507034735bd410760fde6341d54a050. This version has the benefit
of mostly centralizing the state tracking in `SemanticSyntaxChecker`,
although there was some subtlety around deferred function body traversal
that made the changes to `Checker` more intrusive too (hence the new
linter test).
The `Checkpoint` struct/system is obviously overkill for now since it's
only tracking a single `bool`, but I thought it might be more useful
later.
[changed]: https://github.com/python/cpython/issues/77527
Test Plan
--
New inline tests and a new linter integration test.
## 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
<!--
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>
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
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`
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? -->
* 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
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.)
## 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 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
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
`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
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
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
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
Added checks for subscript expressions on builtin classes as in FURB189.
The object is changed to use the collections objects and the types from
the subscript are kept.
Resolves#16130
> Note: Added some comments in the code explaining why
## Test Plan
- Added a subscript dict and list class to the test file.
- Tested locally to check that the symbols are changed and the types are
kept.
- No modifications changed on optional `str` values.
## Summary
Resolves#15859.
The rule now adds parentheses if the original call wraps an unary
expression and is:
* The left-hand side of a binary expression where the operator is `**`.
* The caller of a call expression.
* The subscripted of a subscript expression.
* The object of an attribute access.
The fix will also be marked as unsafe if there are any comments in its
range.
## Test Plan
`cargo nextest run` and `cargo insta test`.
## Summary
Resolves#13294, follow-up to #13882.
At #13882, it was concluded that a fix should not be offered for raw
strings. This change implements that. The five rules in question are now
no longer always fixable.
## Test Plan
`cargo nextest run` and `cargo insta test`.
---------
Co-authored-by: Micha Reiser <micha@reiser.io>
The PR addresses the issue #16040 .
---
The logic used into the rule is the following:
Suppose to have an expression of the form
```python
if a cmp b:
c = d
```
where `a`,` b`, `c` and `d` are Python obj and `cmp` one of `<`, `>`,
`<=`, `>=`.
Then:
- `if a=c and b=d`
- if `<=` fix with `a = max(b, a)`
- if `>=` fix with `a = min(b, a)`
- if `>` fix with `a = min(a, b)`
- if `<` fix with `a = max(a, b)`
- `if a=d and b=c`
- if `<=` fix with `b = min(a, b)`
- if `>=` fix with `b = max(a, b)`
- if `>` fix with `b = max(b, a)`
- if `<` fix with `b = min(b, a)`
- do nothing, i.e., we cannot fix this case.
---
In total we have 8 different and possible cases.
```
| Case | Expression | Fix |
|-------|------------------|---------------|
| 1 | if a >= b: a = b | a = min(b, a) |
| 2 | if a <= b: a = b | a = max(b, a) |
| 3 | if a <= b: b = a | b = min(a, b) |
| 4 | if a >= b: b = a | b = max(a, b) |
| 5 | if a > b: a = b | a = min(a, b) |
| 6 | if a < b: a = b | a = max(a, b) |
| 7 | if a < b: b = a | b = min(b, a) |
| 8 | if a > b: b = a | b = max(b, a) |
```
I added them in the tests.
Please double-check that I didn't make any mistakes. It's quite easy to
mix up > and <.
---------
Co-authored-by: Micha Reiser <micha@reiser.io>
## Summary
* fix ImportPathMoved / ProviderName misuse
* oncrete names, such as `["airflow", "config_templates",
"default_celery", "DEFAULT_CELERY_CONFIG"]`, should use `ProviderName`.
In contrast, module paths like `"airflow", "operators", "weekday", ...`
should use `ImportPathMoved`. Misuse may lead to incorrect detection.
## Test Plan
update test fixture
## Summary
Fixes#16007. The logic from the last fix for this (#9427) was
sufficient, it just wasn't being applied because `Attributes` sections
aren't expected to have nested sections. I just deleted the outer
conditional, which should hopefully fix this for all section types.
## Test Plan
New regression test, plus the existing D417 tests.
## Summary
Resolves#16082.
`UP036` will now also take into consideration whether or not a micro
version number is set:
* If a third element doesn't exist, the existing logic is preserved.
* If it exists but is not an integer literal, the check will not be
reported.
* If it is an integer literal but doesn't fit into a `u8`, the check
will be reported as invalid.
* Otherwise, the compared version is determined to always be less than
the target version when:
* The target's minor version is smaller than that of the comparator, or
* The operator is `<`, the micro version is 0, and the two minor
versions compare equal.
As this is considered a bugfix, it is not preview-gated.
## Test Plan
`cargo nextest run` and `cargo insta test`.
---------
Co-authored-by: Micha Reiser <micha@reiser.io>
The index in subscript access like `d[*y]` will not be linted or
autofixed with parentheses, even when
`lint.ruff.parenthesize-tuple-in-subscript = true`.
Closes#16077
This PR resolved#15772
Before PR:
```
def _(
this_is_fine: int = f(), # No error
this_is_not: list[int] = f() # B008: Do not perform function call `f` in argument defaults
): ...
@dataclass
class _:
this_is_not_fine: list[int] = f() # RUF009: Do not perform function call `f` in dataclass defaults
this_is_also_not: int = f() # RUF009: Do not perform function call `f` in dataclass defaults
```
After PR:
```
def _(
this_is_fine: int = f(), # No error
this_is_not: list[int] = f() # B008: Do not perform function call `f` in argument defaults
): ...
@dataclass
class _:
this_is_not_fine: list[int] = f() # RUF009: Do not perform function call `f` in dataclass defaults
this_is_fine: int = f()
```
## Summary
Follow-up to #15984.
Previously, `PLE1310` would only report when the object is a literal:
```python
'a'.strip('//') # error
foo = ''
foo.strip('//') # no error
```
After this change, objects whose type can be inferred to be either `str`
or `bytes` will also be reported in preview.
## Test Plan
`cargo nextest run` and `cargo insta test`.
## Summary
Resolves#12321.
The physical-line-based `RUF054` checks for form feed characters that
are preceded by only tabs and spaces, but not any other characters,
including form feeds.
## Test Plan
`cargo nextest run` and `cargo insta test`.
## Summary
Follow-up to #16026.
Previously, the fix for this would be marked as unsafe, even though all
comments are preserved:
```python
# .pyi
T: TypeAlias = ( # Comment
int | str
)
```
Now it is safe: comments within the parenthesized range no longer affect
applicability.
## Test Plan
`cargo nextest run` and `cargo insta test`.
---------
Co-authored-by: Dylan <53534755+dylwil3@users.noreply.github.com>
## Summary
Resolves#15968.
Previously, these would be considered violations:
```python
b''.strip('//')
''.lstrip('//', foo = "bar")
```
...while these are not:
```python
b''.strip(b'//')
''.strip('\\b\\x08')
```
Ruff will now not report when the types of the object and that of the
argument mismatch, or when there are extra arguments.
## Test Plan
`cargo nextest run` and `cargo insta test`.
See #15951 for the original discussion and reviews. This is just the
first half of that PR (reaching parity with `flake8-builtins` without
adding any new configuration options) split out for nicer changelog
entries.
For posterity, here's a script for generating the module structure that
was useful for interactive testing and creating the table
[here](https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/pull/15951#issuecomment-2640662041).
The results for this branch are the same as the `Strict` column there,
as expected.
```shell
mkdir abc collections foobar urlparse
for i in */
do
touch $i/__init__.py
done
cp -r abc foobar collections/.
cp -r abc collections foobar/.
touch ruff.toml
touch foobar/logging.py
```
---------
Co-authored-by: Micha Reiser <micha@reiser.io>
## Summary
Part of #15809 and #15876.
This change brings several bugfixes:
* The nested `map()` call in `list(map(lambda x: x, []))` where `list`
is overshadowed is now correctly reported.
* The call will no longer reported if:
* Any arguments given to `map()` are variadic.
* Any of the iterables contain a named expression.
## Test Plan
`cargo nextest run` and `cargo insta test`.
---------
Co-authored-by: Micha Reiser <micha@reiser.io>
## Summary
This change resolves#15814 to ensure that `SIM401` is only triggered on
known dictionary types. Before, the rule was getting triggered even on
types that _resemble_ a dictionary but are not actually a dictionary.
I did this using the `is_known_to_be_of_type_dict(...)` functionality.
The logic for this function was duplicated in a few spots, so I moved
the code to a central location, removed redundant definitions, and
updated existing calls to use the single definition of the function!
## Test Plan
Since this PR only modifies an existing rule, I made changes to the
existing test instead of adding new ones. I made sure that `SIM401` is
triggered on types that are clearly dictionaries and that it's not
triggered on a simple custom dictionary-like type (using a modified
version of [the code in the issue](#15814))
The additional changes to de-duplicate `is_known_to_be_of_type_dict`
don't break any existing tests -- I think this should be fine since the
logic remains the same (please let me know if you think otherwise, I'm
excited to get feedback and work towards a good fix 🙂).
---------
Co-authored-by: Junhson Jean-Baptiste <junhsonjb@naan.mynetworksettings.com>
Co-authored-by: Micha Reiser <micha@reiser.io>
## Summary
Resolves#15997.
Ruff used to introduce syntax errors while fixing these cases, but no
longer will:
```python
{"a": [], **{},}
# ^^^^ Removed, leaving two contiguous commas
{"a": [], **({})}
# ^^^^^ Removed, leaving a stray closing parentheses
```
Previously, the function would take a shortcut if the unpacked
dictionary is empty; now, both cases are handled using the same logic
introduced in #15394. This change slightly modifies that logic to also
remove the first comma following the dictionary, if and only if it is
empty.
## Test Plan
`cargo nextest run` and `cargo insta test`.
## Summary
Resolves#15936.
The fixes will now attempt to preserve the original iterable's format
and quote it if necessary. For `FURB142`, comments within the fix range
will make it unsafe as well.
## Test Plan
`cargo nextest run` and `cargo insta test`.
## Summary
Resolves#15925.
`N803` now checks for functions instead of parameters. In preview mode,
if a method is decorated with `@override` and the current scope is that
of a class, it will be ignored.
## Test Plan
`cargo nextest run` and `cargo insta test`.
## Summary
Follow-up to #15779.
Prior to this change, non-name expressions are not reported at all:
```python
type(a.b) is type(None) # no error
```
This change enhances the rule so that such cases are also reported in
preview. Additionally:
* The fix will now be marked as unsafe if there are any comments within
its range.
* Error messages are slightly modified.
## Test Plan
`cargo nextest run` and `cargo insta test`.
---------
Co-authored-by: Alex Waygood <Alex.Waygood@Gmail.com>
## Summary
This is a new rule to implement the renaming of PEP 695 type parameters
with leading underscores after they have (presumably) been converted
from standalone type variables by either UP046 or UP047. Part of #15642.
I'm not 100% sure the fix is always safe, but I haven't come up with any
counterexamples yet. `Renamer` seems pretty precise, so I don't think
the usual issues with comments apply.
I initially tried writing this as a rule that receives a `Stmt` rather
than a `Binding`, but in that case the
`checker.semantic().current_scope()` was the global scope, rather than
the scope of the type parameters as I needed. Most of the other rules
using `Renamer` also used `Binding`s, but it does have the downside of
offering separate diagnostics for each parameter to rename.
## Test Plan
New snapshot tests for UP049 alone and the combination of UP046, UP049,
and PYI018.
---------
Co-authored-by: Alex Waygood <Alex.Waygood@Gmail.com>
## Summary
This is a follow-up to #15726, #15778, and #15794 to preserve the triple
quote and prefix flags in plain strings, bytestrings, and f-strings.
I also added a `StringLiteralFlags::without_triple_quotes` method to
avoid passing along triple quotes in rules like SIM905 where it might
not make sense, as discussed
[here](https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/pull/15726#discussion_r1930532426).
## Test Plan
Existing tests, plus many new cases in the `generator::tests::quote`
test that should cover all combinations of quotes and prefixes, at least
for simple string bodies.
Closes#7799 when combined with #15694, #15726, #15778, and #15794.
---------
Co-authored-by: Alex Waygood <Alex.Waygood@Gmail.com>
## Summary
Extend AIR302 with
* `airflow.operators.bash.BashOperator →
airflow.providers.standard.operators.bash.BashOperator`
* change existing rules `airflow.operators.bash_operator.BashOperator →
airflow.operators.bash.BashOperator` to
`airflow.operators.bash_operator.BashOperator →
airflow.providers.standard.operators.bash.BashOperator`
## Test Plan
a test fixture has been updated
## Summary
Given the following code:
```python
set(([x for x in range(5)]))
```
the current implementation of C403 results in
```python
{(x for x in range(5))}
```
which is a set containing a generator rather than the result of the
generator.
This change removes the extraneous parentheses so that the resulting
code is:
```python
{x for x in range(5)}
```
## Test Plan
`cargo nextest run` and `cargo insta test`
## Summary
This is a follow-up to #15565, tracked in #15642, to reuse the string
replacement logic from the other PEP 695 rules instead of the
`Generator`, which has the benefit of preserving more comments. However,
comments in some places are still dropped, so I added a check for this
and update the fix safety accordingly. I also added a `## Fix safety`
section to the docs to reflect this and the existing `isinstance`
caveat.
## Test Plan
Existing UP040 tests, plus some new cases.
## Summary
Resolves#10063 and follow-up to #15521.
The fix is now marked as unsafe if there are any comments within its
range. Tests are adapted from that of #15521.
## Test Plan
`cargo nextest run` and `cargo insta test`.
Both `list` and `dict` expect only a single positional argument. Giving
more positional arguments, or a keyword argument, is a `TypeError` and
neither the lint rule nor its fix make sense in that context.
Closes#15810
## Summary
Fixes https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/issues/15812 by visiting the
second argument as a type definition.
## Test Plan
New F401 tests based on the report.
---------
Co-authored-by: Alex Waygood <Alex.Waygood@Gmail.com>
Builtin bindings are given a range of `0..0`, which causes strange
behavior when range checks are made at the top of the file. In this
case, the logic of the rule demands that the value of the dict
comprehension is not self-referential (i.e. it does not contain
definitions for any of the variables used within it). This logic was
confused by builtins which looked like they were defined "in the
comprehension", if the comprehension appeared at the top of the file.
Closes#15830
If there is any `ParenthesizedWhitespace` (in the sense of LibCST) after
the function name `sorted` and before the arguments, then we must wrap
`sorted` with parentheses after removing the surrounding function.
Closes#15789
This PR uses the tokens of the parsed annotation available in the
`Checker`, instead of re-lexing (using `SimpleTokenizer`) the
annotation. This avoids some limitations of the `SimpleTokenizer`, such
as not being able to handle number and string literals.
Closes#15816 .
## Summary
Permits suspicious imports (the `S4` namespaced diagnostics) from stub
files.
Closes#15207.
## Test Plan
Added tests and ran `cargo nextest run`. The test files are copied from
the `.py` variants.
## Summary
This is another follow-up to #15726 and #15778, extending the
quote-preserving behavior to f-strings and deleting the now-unused
`Generator::quote` field.
## Details
I also made one unrelated change to `rules/flynt/helpers.rs` to remove a
`to_string` call for making a `Box<str>` and tweaked some arguments to
some of the `Generator::unparse_f_string` methods to make the code
easier to follow, in my opinion. Happy to revert especially the latter
of these if needed.
Unfortunately this still does not fix the issue in #9660, which appears
to be more of an escaping issue than a quote-preservation issue. After
#15726, the result is now `a = f'# {"".join([])}' if 1 else ""` instead
of `a = f"# {''.join([])}" if 1 else ""` (single quotes on the outside
now), but we still don't have the desired behavior of double quotes
everywhere on Python 3.12+. I added a test for this but split it off
into another branch since it ended up being unaddressed here, but my
`dbg!` statements showed the correct preferred quotes going into
[`UnicodeEscape::with_preferred_quote`](https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/blob/main/crates/ruff_python_literal/src/escape.rs#L54).
## Test Plan
Existing rule and `Generator` tests.
---------
Co-authored-by: Alex Waygood <Alex.Waygood@Gmail.com>
## Summary
Implements some of #14738, by adding support for 6 new patterns:
```py
re.search("abc", s) is None # ⇒ "abc" not in s
re.search("abc", s) is not None # ⇒ "abc" in s
re.match("abc", s) is None # ⇒ not s.startswith("abc")
re.match("abc", s) is not None # ⇒ s.startswith("abc")
re.fullmatch("abc", s) is None # ⇒ s != "abc"
re.fullmatch("abc", s) is not None # ⇒ s == "abc"
```
## Test Plan
```shell
cargo nextest run
cargo insta review
```
And ran the fix on my startup's repo.
## Note
One minor limitation here:
```py
if not re.match('abc', s) is None:
pass
```
will get fixed to this (technically correct, just not nice):
```py
if not not s.startswith('abc'):
pass
```
This seems fine given that Ruff has this covered: the initial code
should be caught by
[E714](https://docs.astral.sh/ruff/rules/not-is-test/) and the fixed
code should be caught by
[SIM208](https://docs.astral.sh/ruff/rules/double-negation/).
## Summary
Resolves#12717.
This change incorporates the logic added in #15588.
## Test Plan
`cargo nextest run` and `cargo insta test`.
---------
Co-authored-by: Dhruv Manilawala <dhruvmanila@gmail.com>
## Summary
This is a first step toward fixing #7799 by using the quoting style
stored in the `flags` field on `ast::StringLiteral`s to select a quoting
style. This PR does not include support for f-strings or byte strings.
Several rules also needed small updates to pass along existing quoting
styles instead of using `StringLiteralFlags::default()`. The remaining
snapshot changes are intentional and should preserve the quotes from the
input strings.
## Test Plan
Existing tests with some accepted updates, plus a few new RUF055 tests
for raw strings.
---------
Co-authored-by: Alex Waygood <alex.waygood@gmail.com>
## Summary
<!-- What's the purpose of the change? What does it do, and why? -->
* feat
* add is_execute_method_inherits_from_airflow_operator for checking the
removed context key in the execute method
* refactor: rename
* is_airflow_task as is_airflow_task_function_def
* in_airflow_task as in_airflow_task_function_def
* removed_in_3 as airflow_3_removal_expr
* removed_in_3_function_def as airflow_3_removal_function_def
* test:
* reorganize test cases
## Test Plan
a test fixture has been updated
---------
Co-authored-by: Dhruv Manilawala <dhruvmanila@gmail.com>
**Summary**
Airflow 3.0 removes a set of deprecated context variables that were
phased out in 2.x. This PR introduces lint rules to detect usage of
these removed variables in various patterns, helping identify
incompatibilities. The removed context variables include:
```
conf
execution_date
next_ds
next_ds_nodash
next_execution_date
prev_ds
prev_ds_nodash
prev_execution_date
prev_execution_date_success
tomorrow_ds
yesterday_ds
yesterday_ds_nodash
```
**Detected Patterns and Examples**
The linter now flags the use of removed context variables in the
following scenarios:
1. **Direct Subscript Access**
```python
execution_date = context["execution_date"] # Flagged
```
2. **`.get("key")` Method Calls**
```python
print(context.get("execution_date")) # Flagged
```
3. **Variables Assigned from `get_current_context()`**
If a variable is assigned from `get_current_context()` and then used to
access a removed key:
```python
c = get_current_context()
print(c.get("execution_date")) # Flagged
```
4. **Function Parameters in `@task`-Decorated Functions**
Parameters named after removed context variables in functions decorated
with `@task` are flagged:
```python
from airflow.decorators import task
@task
def my_task(execution_date, **kwargs): # Parameter 'execution_date'
flagged
pass
```
5. **Removed Keys in Task Decorator `kwargs` and Other Scenarios**
Other similar patterns where removed context variables appear (e.g., as
part of `kwargs` in a `@task` function) are also detected.
```
from airflow.decorators import task
@task
def process_with_execution_date(**context):
execution_date = lambda: context["execution_date"] # flagged
print(execution_date)
@task(kwargs={"execution_date": "2021-01-01"}) # flagged
def task_with_kwargs(**context):
pass
```
**Test Plan**
Test fixtures covering various patterns of deprecated context usage are
included in this PR. For example:
```python
from airflow.decorators import task, dag, get_current_context
from airflow.models import DAG
from airflow.operators.dummy import DummyOperator
import pendulum
from datetime import datetime
@task
def access_invalid_key_task(**context):
print(context.get("conf")) # 'conf' flagged
@task
def print_config(**context):
execution_date = context["execution_date"] # Flagged
prev_ds = context["prev_ds"] # Flagged
@task
def from_current_context():
context = get_current_context()
print(context["execution_date"]) # Flagged
# Usage outside of a task decorated function
c = get_current_context()
print(c.get("execution_date")) # Flagged
@task
def some_task(execution_date, **kwargs):
print("execution date", execution_date) # Parameter flagged
@dag(
start_date=pendulum.datetime(2021, 1, 1, tz="UTC")
)
def my_dag():
task1 = DummyOperator(
task_id="task1",
params={
"execution_date": "{{ execution_date }}", # Flagged in template context
},
)
access_invalid_key_task()
print_config()
from_current_context()
dag = my_dag()
class CustomOperator(BaseOperator):
def execute(self, context):
execution_date = context.get("execution_date") # Flagged
next_ds = context.get("next_ds") # Flagged
next_execution_date = context["next_execution_date"] # Flagged
```
Ruff will emit `AIR302` diagnostics for each deprecated usage, with
suggestions when applicable, aiding in code migration to Airflow 3.0.
related: https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/44409,
https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/41641
---------
Co-authored-by: Wei Lee <weilee.rx@gmail.com>
## Summary
Fixes#9663 and also improves the fixes for
[RUF055](https://docs.astral.sh/ruff/rules/unnecessary-regular-expression/)
since regular expressions are often written as raw strings.
This doesn't include raw f-strings.
## Test Plan
Existing snapshots for RUF055 and PT009, plus a new `Generator` test and
a regression test for the reported `PIE810` issue.
## Summary
Addresses the second follow up to #15565 in #15642. This was easier than
expected by using this cool destructuring syntax I hadn't used before,
and by assuming
[PYI059](https://docs.astral.sh/ruff/rules/generic-not-last-base-class/)
(`generic-not-last-base-class`).
## Test Plan
Using an existing test, plus two new tests combining multiple base
classes and multiple generics. It looks like I deleted a relevant test,
which I did, but I meant to rename this in #15565. It looks like instead
I copied it and renamed the copy.
---------
Co-authored-by: Alex Waygood <Alex.Waygood@Gmail.com>
## Summary
This PR extends our [PEP 695](https://peps.python.org/pep-0695) handling
from the type aliases handled by `UP040` to generic function and class
parameters, as suggested in the latter two examples from #4617:
```python
# Input
T = TypeVar("T", bound=float)
class A(Generic[T]):
...
def f(t: T):
...
# Output
class A[T: float]:
...
def f[T: float](t: T):
...
```
I first implemented this as part of `UP040`, but based on a brief
discussion during a very helpful pairing session with @AlexWaygood, I
opted to split them into rules separate from `UP040` and then also
separate from each other. From a quick look, and based on [this
issue](https://github.com/asottile/pyupgrade/issues/836), I'm pretty
sure neither of these rules is currently in pyupgrade, so I just took
the next available codes, `UP046` and `UP047`.
The last main TODO, noted in the rule file and in the fixture, is to
handle generic method parameters not included in the class itself, `S`
in this case:
```python
T = TypeVar("T")
S = TypeVar("S")
class Foo(Generic[T]):
def bar(self, x: T, y: S) -> S: ...
```
but Alex mentioned that that might be okay to leave for a follow-up PR.
I also left a TODO about handling multiple subclasses instead of bailing
out when more than one is present. I'm not sure how common that would
be, but I can still handle it here, or follow up on that too.
I think this is unrelated to the PR, but when I ran `cargo dev
generate-all`, it removed the rule code `PLW0101` from
`ruff.schema.json`. It seemed unrelated, so I left that out, but I
wanted to mention it just in case.
## Test Plan
New test fixture, `cargo nextest run`
Closes#4617, closes#12542
---------
Co-authored-by: Alex Waygood <Alex.Waygood@Gmail.com>
## Summary
We were mistakenly using `CommentRanges::has_comments` to determine
whether our edits
were safe, which sometimes expands the checked range to the end of a
line. But in order to
determine safety we need to check exactly the range we're replacing.
This bug affected the rules `runtime-cast-value` (`TC006`) and
`quoted-type-alias` (`TC008`)
although it was very unlikely to be hit for `TC006` and for `TC008` we
never hit it because we
were checking the wrong expression.
## 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?
-->
## Summary
Fixes parentheses not being stripped in C401. Pretty much the same as
#11607 which fixed it for C400.
## Test Plan
`cargo nextest run`
Dan Parizher
Victor Hugo Gomes
chiri
Robsdedude
Hmvp
Gideon
Gene Parmesan Thomas
Deric Crago
Dylan
Charlie Marsh
Frazer McLean
Nikolas Hearp
Denys Kyslytsyn
Juriah
Brent Westbrook
𝕂
Victorien
Wei Lee
Marcus Näslund
vjurczenia
Viktor Merkurev
Max Mynter
Vasanth
Dimitri Papadopoulos Orfanos
omahs
Micha Reiser
Hans
Vasco Schiavo
David Salvisberg
w0nder1ng
trag1c
Mohammad Amin Ghasemi
Aarni Koskela
John Stilley
Kaxil Naik
Mauro Fontana
InSync
Jelle Zijlstra
Adam Johnson
Darius Carrier
sobolevn
cake-monotone
Ayush Baweja
Vlad Nedelcu
Alex Waygood
Dylan
ABDULRAHMAN ALRAHMA
Junhson Jean-Baptiste
Mike Perlov
Justin Bramley
Tom Kuson
Garrett Reynolds
Ankit Chaurasia
wooly18
Akira Noda
guillaumeLepape