Summary
--
This is the last main difference between the `OldDiagnostic` and
`Message`
types, so attaching a `SourceFile` to `OldDiagnostic` should make
combining the
two types almost trivial.
Initially I updated the remaining rules without access to a `Checker` to
take a
`&SourceFile` directly, but after Micha's suggestion in
https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/pull/18356#discussion_r2113281552, I
updated all of these calls to take a
`LintContext` instead. This new type is a thin wrapper around a
`RefCell<Vec<OldDiagnostic>>`
and a `SourceFile` and now has the `report_diagnostic` method returning
a `DiagnosticGuard` instead of `Checker`.
This allows the same `Drop`-based implementation to be used in cases
without a `Checker` and also avoids a lot of intermediate allocations of
`Vec<OldDiagnostic>`s.
`Checker` now also contains a `LintContext`, which it defers to for its
`report_diagnostic` methods, which I preserved for convenience.
Test Plan
--
Existing tests
Summary
--
It's a bit late in the refactoring process, but I think there are still
a couple of PRs left before getting rid of this type entirely, so I
thought it would still be worth doing.
This PR is just a quick rename with no other changes.
Test Plan
--
Existing tests
## Summary
This PR unifies the ruff `Message` enum variants for syntax errors and
rule violations into a single `Message` struct consisting of a shared
`db::Diagnostic` and some additional, optional fields used for some rule
violations.
This version of `Message` is nearly a drop-in replacement for
`ruff_diagnostics::Diagnostic`, which is the next step I have in mind
for the refactor.
I think this is also a useful checkpoint because we could possibly add
some of these optional fields to the new `Diagnostic` type. I think
we've previously discussed wanting support for `Fix`es, but the other
fields seem less relevant, so we may just need to preserve the `Message`
wrapper for a bit longer.
## Test plan
Existing tests
---------
Co-authored-by: Micha Reiser <micha@reiser.io>
## Stack Summary
This stack splits `Settings` into `FormatterSettings` and `LinterSettings` and moves it into `ruff_workspace`. This change is necessary to add the `FormatterSettings` to `Settings` without adding `ruff_python_formatter` as a dependency to `ruff_linter` (and the linter should not contain the formatter settings).
A quick overview of our settings struct at play:
* `Options`: 1:1 representation of the options in the `pyproject.toml` or `ruff.toml`. Used for deserialization.
* `Configuration`: Resolved `Options`, potentially merged from multiple configurations (when using `extend`). The representation is very close if not identical to the `Options`.
* `Settings`: The resolved configuration that uses a data format optimized for reading. Optional fields are initialized with their default values. Initialized by `Configuration::into_settings` .
The goal of this stack is to split `Settings` into tool-specific resolved `Settings` that are independent of each other. This comes at the advantage that the individual crates don't need to know anything about the other tools. The downside is that information gets duplicated between `Settings`. Right now the duplication is minimal (`line-length`, `tab-width`) but we may need to come up with a solution if more expensive data needs sharing.
This stack focuses on `Settings`. Splitting `Configuration` into some smaller structs is something I'll follow up on later.
## PR Summary
This PR extracts the linter-specific settings into a new `LinterSettings` struct and adds it as a `linter` field to the `Settings` struct. This is in preparation for moving `Settings` from `ruff_linter` to `ruff_workspace`
## Test Plan
`cargo test`
Brent Westbrook
Micha Reiser
konsti
Charlie Marsh