<!--
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? -->
This PR ports PLE0117 as a semantic syntax error.
## Test Plan
<!-- How was it tested? -->
Tests previously written
---------
Signed-off-by: 11happy <soni5happy@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Brent Westbrook <36778786+ntBre@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Brent Westbrook <brentrwestbrook@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Alex Waygood <Alex.Waygood@Gmail.com>
## Summary
Fixes FURB157 false negative where `Decimal("_-1")` was not flagged as
verbose when underscores precede the sign character. This fixes#21186.
## Problem Analysis
The `verbose-decimal-constructor` (FURB157) rule failed to detect
verbose `Decimal` constructors when the sign character (`+` or `-`) was
preceded by underscores. For example, `Decimal("_-1")` was not flagged,
even though it can be simplified to `Decimal(-1)`.
The bug occurred because the rule checked for the sign character at the
start of the string before stripping leading underscores. According to
Python's `Decimal` parser behavior (as documented in CPython's
`_pydecimal.py`), underscores are removed before parsing the sign. The
rule's logic didn't match this behavior, causing a false negative for
cases like `"_-1"` where the underscore came before the sign.
This was a regression introduced in version 0.14.3, as these cases were
correctly flagged in version 0.14.2.
## Approach
The fix updates the sign extraction logic to:
1. Strip leading underscores first (matching Python's Decimal parser
behavior)
2. Extract the sign from the underscore-stripped string
3. Preserve the string after the sign for normalization purposes
This ensures that cases like `Decimal("_-1")`, `Decimal("_+1")`, and
`Decimal("_-1_000")` are correctly detected and flagged. The
normalization logic was also updated to use the string after the sign
(without underscores) to avoid double signs in the replacement output.
<!--
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? -->
* extend AIR301 to include deprecated argument `concurrency` in
`airflow....DAG`
## Test Plan
<!-- How was it tested? -->
update the existing test fixture in the first commit and then reorganize
in the second one
Summary
--
This code has been unused since #14233 but not detected by clippy I
guess. This should help to remove the temptation to use the set
comparison again like I suggested in #21144. And we shouldn't do the set
comparison because of #13802, which #14233 fixed.
Test Plan
--
Existing tests
The parser currently uses single quotes to wrap tokens. This is
inconsistent with the rest of ruff/ty, which use backticks.
For example, see the inconsistent diagnostics produced in this simple
example: https://play.ty.dev/0a9d6eab-6599-4a1d-8e40-032091f7f50f
Consistently wrapping tokens in backticks produces uniform diagnostics.
Following the style decision of #723, in #2889 some quotes were already
switched into backticks.
This is also in line with Rust's guide on diagnostics
(https://rustc-dev-guide.rust-lang.org/diagnostics.html#diagnostic-structure):
> When code or an identifier must appear in a message or label, it
should be surrounded with backticks
Summary
--
Fixes#21121 by upgrading `RuntimeEvaluated` annotations like
`dataclasses.KW_ONLY` to `RuntimeRequired`. We already had special
handling for
`TypingOnly` annotations in this context but not `RuntimeEvaluated`.
Combining
that with the `future-annotations` setting, which allowed ignoring the
`RuntimeEvaluated` flag, led to the reported bug where we would try to
move
`KW_ONLY` into a `TYPE_CHECKING` block.
Test Plan
--
A new test based on the issue
<!--
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
Fixed the incorrect import example in the "correct exmaple"
<!-- What's the purpose of the change? What does it do, and why? -->
## 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
<!-- What's the purpose of the change? What does it do, and why? -->
This PR refactors semantic error tests in each seperate file
## Test Plan
<!-- How was it tested? -->
## CC
- @ntBre
---------
Signed-off-by: 11happy <soni5happy@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Brent Westbrook <brentrwestbrook@gmail.com>
<!--
Thank you for contributing to Ruff/ty! To help us out with reviewing,
please consider the following:
- Does this pull request include a summary of the change? (See below.)
- Does this pull request include a descriptive title? (Please prefix
with `[ty]` for ty pull
requests.)
- Does this pull request include references to any relevant issues?
-->
## Summary
Add docstring sections which were missing from the numpy list as pointed
out here #20923. For now these are only the official sections as
documented
[here](https://numpydoc.readthedocs.io/en/latest/format.html#sections).
## Test Plan
Added a test case for DOC102
## Summary
Fixes#20973 (`docstring-extraneous-exception`) false positive when
exceptions mentioned in docstrings are caught and explicitly re-raised
using `raise e` or `raise e from None`.
## Problem Analysis
The DOC502 rule was incorrectly flagging exceptions mentioned in
docstrings as "not explicitly raised" when they were actually being
explicitly re-raised through exception variables bound in `except`
clauses.
**Root Cause**: The `BodyVisitor` in `check_docstring.rs` only checked
for direct exception references (like `raise OSError()`) but didn't
recognize when a variable bound to an exception in an `except` clause
was being re-raised.
**Example of the bug**:
```python
def f():
"""Do nothing.
Raises
------
OSError
If the OS errors.
"""
try:
pass
except OSError as e:
raise e # This was incorrectly flagged as not explicitly raising OSError
```
The issue occurred because `resolve_qualified_name(e)` couldn't resolve
the variable `e` to a qualified exception name, since `e` is just a
variable binding, not a direct reference to an exception class.
## Approach
Modified the `BodyVisitor` in
`crates/ruff_linter/src/rules/pydoclint/rules/check_docstring.rs` to:
1. **Track exception variable bindings**: Added `exception_variables`
field to map exception variable names to their exception types within
`except` clauses
2. **Enhanced raise statement detection**: Updated `visit_stmt` to check
if a `raise` statement uses a variable name that's bound to an exception
in the current `except` clause
3. **Proper scope management**: Clear exception variable mappings when
leaving `except` handlers to prevent cross-contamination
**Key changes**:
- Added `exception_variables: FxHashMap<&'a str, QualifiedName<'a>>` to
track variable-to-exception mappings
- Enhanced `visit_except_handler` to store exception variable bindings
when entering `except` clauses
- Modified `visit_stmt` to check for variable-based re-raising: `raise
e` → lookup `e` in `exception_variables`
- Clear mappings when exiting `except` handlers to maintain proper scope
---------
Co-authored-by: Brent Westbrook <brentrwestbrook@gmail.com>
## Summary
implement pylint rule stop-iteration-return / R1708
## Test Plan
<!-- How was it tested? -->
---------
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
<!-- What's the purpose of the change? What does it do, and why? -->
* Extend `airflow.models.Param` to include `airflow.models.param.Param`
case and include both `airflow.models.param.ParamDict` and
`airflow.models.param.DagParam` and their `airflow.models.` counter part
## Test Plan
<!-- How was it tested? -->
update the text fixture accordingly and reorganize them in the third
commit
Summary
--
Inspired by #20859, this PR adds the version a rule was added, and the
file and line where it was defined, to `ViolationMetadata`. The file and
line just use the standard `file!` and `line!` macros, while the more
interesting version field uses a new `violation_metadata` attribute
parsed by our `ViolationMetadata` derive macro.
I moved the commit modifying all of the rule files to the end, so it
should be a lot easier to review by omitting that one.
As a curiosity and a bit of a sanity check, I also plotted the rule
numbers over time:
<img width="640" height="480" alt="image"
src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/75b0b5cc-3521-4d40-a395-8807e6f4925f"
/>
I think this looks pretty reasonable and avoids some of the artifacts
the earlier versions of the script ran into, such as the `rule`
sub-command not being available or `--explain` requiring a file
argument.
<details><summary>Script and summary data</summary>
```shell
gawk --csv '
NR > 1 {
split($2, a, ".")
major = a[1]; minor = a[2]; micro = a[3]
# sum the number of rules added per minor version
versions[minor] += 1
}
END {
tot = 0
for (i = 0; i <= 14; i++) {
tot += versions[i]
print i, tot
}
}
' ruff_rules_metadata.csv > summary.dat
```
```
0 696
1 768
2 778
3 803
4 822
5 848
6 855
7 865
8 893
9 915
10 916
11 924
12 929
13 932
14 933
```
</details>
Test Plan
--
I built and viewed the documentation locally, and it looks pretty good!
<img width="1466" height="676" alt="image"
src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/5e227df4-7294-4d12-bdaa-31cac4e9ad5c"
/>
The spacing seems a bit awkward following the `h1` at the top, so I'm
wondering if this might look nicer as a footer in Ruff. The links work
well too:
- [v0.0.271](https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/releases/tag/v0.0.271)
- [Related
issues](https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/issues?q=sort%3Aupdated-desc%20is%3Aissue%20is%3Aopen%20airflow-variable-name-task-id-mismatch)
- [View
source](https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/blob/main/crates%2Fruff_linter%2Fsrc%2Frules%2Fairflow%2Frules%2Ftask_variable_name.rs#L34)
The last one even works on `main` now since it points to the
`derive(ViolationMetadata)` line.
In terms of binary size, this branch is a bit bigger than main with
38,654,520 bytes compared to 38,635,728 (+20 KB). I guess that's not
_too_ much of an increase, but I wanted to check since we're generating
a lot more code with macros.
---------
Co-authored-by: GiGaGon <107241144+MeGaGiGaGon@users.noreply.github.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
<!-- What's the purpose of the change? What does it do, and why? -->
Fixes#21017
Taught UP032’s parenthesize check to ignore underscores when inspecting
decimal integer literals so the converter emits `f"{(1_2).real}"`
instead of invalid syntax.
## Test Plan
Added test cases to UP032_2.py.
<!-- 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
<!-- What's the purpose of the change? What does it do, and why? -->
Fixes#18778
Prevent SIM911 from triggering when zip() is called on .keys()/.values()
that take any positional or keyword arguments, so Ruff
never suggests the lossy rewrite.
## Test Plan
<!-- How was it tested? -->
Added a test case to SIM911.py.
## Summary
<!-- What's the purpose of the change? What does it do, and why? -->
This PR implements a new semantic syntax error where name is parameter &
global.
## Test Plan
<!-- How was it tested? -->
I have written inline test as directed in #17412
---------
Signed-off-by: 11happy <soni5happy@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Brent Westbrook <36778786+ntBre@users.noreply.github.com>
## Summary
Implement handling of ellipsis (`...`) defaults in the `FAST002` autofix
to correctly differentiate between required and optional parameters in
FastAPI route definitions.
Previously, the autofix did not properly handle cases where parameters
used `...` as a default value (to indicate required parameters). This
could lead to incorrect transformations when applying the autofix.
This change updates the `FAST002` autofix logic to:
- Correctly recognize `...` as a valid FastAPI required default.
- Preserve the semantics of required parameters while still applying
other autofix improvements.
- Avoid incorrectly substituting or removing ellipsis defaults.
Fixes https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/issues/20800
## Test Plan
Added a new test fixture at:
```crates/ruff_linter/resources/test/fixtures/fastapi/FAST002_2.py```
<!--
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? -->
Fixes#20941
Skip autofix for keyword and __debug__ path params
## Test Plan
<!-- How was it tested? -->
I added two test cases to
crates/ruff_linter/resources/test/fixtures/fastapi/FAST003.py.
Closes#20997
This will _decrease_ the number of diagnostics emitted for
[zip-without-explicit-strict
(B905)](https://docs.astral.sh/ruff/rules/zip-without-explicit-strict/#zip-without-explicit-strict-b905),
since previously it triggered on any `zip` call no matter the number of
arguments. It may _increase_ the number of diagnostics for
[map-without-explicit-strict
(B912)](https://docs.astral.sh/ruff/rules/map-without-explicit-strict/#map-without-explicit-strict-b912)
since it will now trigger on a single starred argument where before it
would not. However, the latter rule is in `preview` so this is
acceptable.
Note - we do not need to make any changes to
[batched-without-explicit-strict
(B911)](https://docs.astral.sh/ruff/rules/batched-without-explicit-strict/#batched-without-explicit-strict-b911)
since that just takes a single iterable.
I am doing this in one PR rather than two because we should keep the
behavior of these rules consistent with one another.
For review: apologies for the unreadability of the snapshot for `B905`.
Unfortunately I saw no way of keeping a small diff and a correct fixture
(the fixture labeled a whole block as `# Error` whereas now several in
the block became `# Ok`).Probably simplest to just view the actual
snapshot - it's relatively small.
## Summary
Make rules `INT001`, `INT002`, and `INT003` also
* trigger on qualified names when we're sure the calls are calls to the
`gettext` module. For example
```python
from gettext import gettext as foo
foo(f"{'bar'}") # very certain that this is a call to a real `gettext`
function => worth linting
```
* trigger on `builtins` bindings
```python
from builtins, gettext
gettext.install("...") # binds `gettext.gettext` to `builtins._`
builtins.__dict__["_"] = ... # also a common pattern
_(f"{'bar'}") # should therefore also be linted
```
Fixes: https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/issues/19028
## Test Plan
Tests have been added to all three rules.
---------
Co-authored-by: Brent Westbrook <36778786+ntBre@users.noreply.github.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
<!-- What's the purpose of the change? What does it do, and why? -->
This PR implements semantic syntax error where alternative patterns bind
different names
## Test Plan
<!-- How was it tested? -->
I have written inline tests as directed in #17412
---------
Signed-off-by: 11happy <soni5happy@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Brent Westbrook <brentrwestbrook@gmail.com>
Summary
--
This PR unifies the two different ways Ruff and ty construct syntax
errors. Ruff has been storing the primary message in the diagnostic
itself, while ty attached the message to the primary annotation:
```
> ruff check try.py
invalid-syntax: name capture `x` makes remaining patterns unreachable
--> try.py:2:10
|
1 | match 42:
2 | case x: ...
| ^
3 | case y: ...
|
Found 1 error.
> uvx ty check try.py
WARN ty is pre-release software and not ready for production use. Expect to encounter bugs, missing features, and fatal errors.
Checking ------------------------------------------------------------ 1/1 files
error[invalid-syntax]
--> try.py:2:10
|
1 | match 42:
2 | case x: ...
| ^ name capture `x` makes remaining patterns unreachable
3 | case y: ...
|
Found 1 diagnostic
```
I think there are benefits to both approaches, and I do like ty's
version, but I feel like we should pick one (and it might help with
#20901 eventually). I slightly prefer Ruff's version, so I went with
that. Hopefully this isn't too controversial, but I'm happy to close
this if it is.
Note that this shouldn't change any other diagnostic formats in ty
because
[`Diagnostic::primary_message`](98d27c4128/crates/ruff_db/src/diagnostic/mod.rs (L177))
was already falling back to the primary annotation message if the
diagnostic message was empty. As a result, I think this change will
partially resolve the FIXME therein.
Test Plan
--
Existing tests with updated snapshots
## Summary
Implement `docstring-extraneous-parameter` (`DOC102`). This rule checks
that all parameters present in a functions docstring are also present in
its signature.
Split from #13280, per this
[comment](https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/pull/13280#issuecomment-3280575506).
Part of #12434.
## Test Plan
Test cases added.
---------
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
<!-- What's the purpose of the change? What does it do, and why? -->
This PR implements `F702`
https://docs.astral.sh/ruff/rules/continue-outside-loop/ as semantic
syntax error.
## Test Plan
<!-- How was it tested? -->
Tests are already previously written in F702
---------
Signed-off-by: 11happy <soni5happy@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
<!-- What's the purpose of the change? What does it do, and why? -->
`airflow.datasets.DatasetEvent` has been removed in 3 but `AssetEvent`
might be added in the future
## Test Plan
<!-- How was it tested? -->
update the test fixture and reorg in the second commit
## Summary
Fixed a typo. It should be "or", not "of". Both `.pop()` and `next()` on
an empty collection will raise `IndexError`, not "`[0]` of the `pop()`
function"
## Test Plan
n/a
<!--
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? -->
This PR implements https://docs.astral.sh/ruff/rules/break-outside-loop/
(F701) as a semantic syntax error.
## Test Plan
<!-- How was it tested? -->
---------
Signed-off-by: 11happy <soni5happy@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Brent Westbrook <brentrwestbrook@gmail.com>
## Summary
Based on the suggestion in
https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/issues/20774#issuecomment-3383153511,
I added rendering of unsupported syntax errors in our `format` test.
In support of this, I added a `DummyFileResolver` type to `ruff_db` to
pass to `DisplayDiagnostics::new` (first commit). Another option would
obviously be implementing this directly in the fixtures, but we'd have
to import a `NotebookIndex` somehow; either by depending directly on
`ruff_notebook` or re-exporting it from `ruff_db`. I thought it might be
convenient elsewhere to have a dummy resolver, for example in the
parser, where we currently have a separate rendering pipeline
[copied](https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/blob/main/crates/ruff_python_parser/tests/fixtures.rs#L321)
from our old rendering code in `ruff_linter`. I also briefly tried
implementing a `TestDb` in the formatter since I noticed the
`ruff_python_formatter::db` module, but that was turning into a lot more
code than the dummy resolver.
We could also push this a bit further if we wanted. I didn't add the new
snapshots to the black compatibility tests or to the preview snapshots,
for example. I thought it was kind of noisy enough (and helpful enough)
already, though. We could also use a shorter diagnostic format, but the
full output seems most useful once we accept this initial large batch of
changes.
## Test Plan
I went through the baseline snapshots pretty quickly, but they all
looked reasonable to me, with one exception I noted below. I also tested
that the case from #20774 produces a new unsupported syntax error.
## Summary
Resolves#19384.
- Distinguishes more clearly between `date` and `datetime` objects.
- Uniformly links to the relevant Python docs from rules in this
category.
I've tried to be clearer, but there's still a contradiction in the rules
as written: we say "use timezone-aware objects", but `date`s are
inherently timezone-naive.
Also, the full docs don't always match the error message: for instance,
in [DTZ012](https://docs.astral.sh/ruff/rules/call-date-fromtimestamp/),
the example says to use:
```python
datetime.datetime.fromtimestamp(946684800, tz=datetime.UTC)
```
while `fix_title` returns "Use `datetime.datetime.fromtimestamp(ts,
tz=...)**.date()**` instead".
I have left this as it was for now.
## Test Plan
Ran `mkdocs` locally and inspected result.
## Summary
The original autofix for G004 was quietly dropping everything but the
f-string components of any implicit concatenation sequence; this
addresses that.
Side note: It looks like `f_strings` is a bit risky to use (since it
implicitly skips non-f-string parts); use iter and include implicitly
concatenated pieces. We should consider if it's worth having
(convenience vs. bit risky).
## Test Plan
```
cargo test -p ruff_linter
```
Backtest (run new testcases against previous implementation):
```
git checkout HEAD^ crates/ruff_linter/src/rules/flake8_logging_format/rules/logging_call.rs
cargot test -p ruff_linter
```
Resolves https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/issues/20694
This PR updates the `zip_without_explicit_strict` and
`map_without_explicit_strict` rules so their fixes are always marked
unsafe, following Brent's guidance that adding `strict=False` can
silently preserve buggy behaviour when inputs differ. The fix safety
docs now spell out that reasoning, the applicability drops to `Unsafe`,
and the snapshots were refreshed so Ruff clearly warns users before
applying the edit.
Summary
--
Closes#19467 and also removes the warning about using Python 3.14
without
preview enabled.
I also bumped `PythonVersion::default` to 3.9 because it reaches EOL
this month,
but we could also defer that for now if we wanted.
The first three commits are related to the `latest` bump to 3.14; the
fourth commit
bumps the default to 3.10.
Note that this PR also bumps the default Python version for ty to 3.10
because
there was a test asserting that it stays in sync with
`ast::PythonVersion`.
Test Plan
--
Existing tests
I spot-checked the ecosystem report, and I believe these are all
expected. Inbits doesn't specify a target Python version, so I guess
we're applying the default. UP007, UP035, and UP045 all use the new
default value to emit new diagnostics.
## Summary
Fixes#20700
`else` and `elif` blocks could previously be deleted when applying a fix
for this rule. If an `else` or `elif` branch is detected the rule will
not trigger. So now the rule will only flag if it is safe.
## Summary
Resolves#20004
The implementation now supports guaranteed-mutable expressions in the
following cases:
- Tuple literals with mutable elements (supporting deep nesting)
- Generator expressions
- Named expressions (walrus operator) containing mutable components
Preserves original formatting for assignment value:
```python
# Test case
def f5(x=([1, ])):
print(x)
```
```python
# Fix before
def f5(x=(None)):
if x is None:
x = [1]
print(x)
```
```python
# Fix after
def f5(x=None):
if x is None:
x = ([1, ])
print(x)
```
The expansion of detected expressions and the new fixes gated behind
previews.
## Test Plan
- Added B006_9.py with a bunch of test cases
- Generated snapshots
---------
Co-authored-by: Igor Drokin <drokinii1017@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: dylwil3 <dylwil3@gmail.com>
Resolves https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/issues/20512
This PR expands FA102’s preview coverage to flag every
PEP 585-compatible API that breaks without from `from __future__ import
annotations`, including `collections.abc`. The rule now treats asyncio
futures, pathlib-style queues, weakref containers, shelve proxies, and
the full `collections.abc` family as generics once preview mode is
enabled.
Stable behavior is unchanged; the broader matching runs behind
`is_future_required_preview_generics_enabled`, letting us vet the new
diagnostics before marking them as stable.
I've also added a snapshot test that covers all of the newly supported
types.
Check out
https://docs.python.org/3/library/stdtypes.html#standard-generic-classes
for a list of commonly used PEP 585-compatible APIs.
<!--
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? -->
Fixes#19837
Track quote usage across the joiner and parts to choose a safe f-string
quote or skip the fix when both appear.
## Test Plan
<!-- How was it tested? -->
Add regression coverage to FLY002.py
<!--
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? -->
Since we are trying to import both `AutoImport` and `SourceModuleMoved`,
the previous naming was not as descriptive. Renaming it to `Rename`
better reflects the intention.
## Test Plan
<!-- How was it tested? -->
no functionality change
## Summary
This PR uses the new `Diagnostic` type for rendering formatter
diagnostics. This allows the formatter to inherit all of the output
formats already implemented in the linter and ty. For example, here's
the new `full` output format, with the formatting diff displayed using
the same infrastructure as the linter:
<img width="592" height="364" alt="image"
src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/6d09817d-3f27-4960-aa8b-41ba47fb4dc0"
/>
<details><summary>Resolved TODOs</summary>
<p>
~~There are several limitiations/todos here still, especially around the
`OutputFormat` type~~:
- [x] A few literal `todo!`s for the remaining `OutputFormat`s without
matching `DiagnosticFormat`s
- [x] The default output format is `full` instead of something more
concise like the current output
- [x] Some of the output formats (namely JSON) have information that
doesn't make much sense for these diagnostics
The first of these is definitely resolved, and I think the other two are
as well, based on discussion on the design document. In brief, we're
okay inheriting the default `OutputFormat` and can separate the global
option into `lint.output-format` and `format.output-format` in the
future, if needed; and we're okay including redundant information in the
non-human-readable output formats.
My last major concern is with the performance of the new code, as
discussed in the `Benchmarks` section below.
A smaller question is whether we should use `Diagnostic`s for formatting
errors too. I think the answer to this is yes, in line with changes
we're making in the linter too. I still need to implement that here.
</p>
</details>
<details><summary>Benchmarks</summary>
<p>
The values in the table are from a large benchmark on the CPython 3.10
code
base, which involves checking 2011 files, 1872 of which need to be
reformatted.
`stable` corresponds to the same code used on `main`, while
`preview-full` and
`preview-concise` use the new `Diagnostic` code gated behind `--preview`
for the
`full` and `concise` output formats, respectively. `stable-diff` uses
the
`--diff` to compare the two diff rendering approaches. See the full
hyperfine
command below for more details. For a sense of scale, the `stable`
output format
produces 1873 lines on stdout, compared to 855,278 for `preview-full`
and
857,798 for `stable-diff`.
| Command | Mean [ms] | Min [ms] | Max [ms] | Relative |
|:------------------|--------------:|---------:|---------:|-------------:|
| `stable` | 201.2 ± 6.8 | 192.9 | 220.6 | 1.00 |
| `preview-full` | 9113.2 ± 31.2 | 9076.1 | 9152.0 | 45.29 ± 1.54 |
| `preview-concise` | 214.2 ± 1.4 | 212.0 | 217.6 | 1.06 ± 0.04 |
| `stable-diff` | 3308.6 ± 20.2 | 3278.6 | 3341.8 | 16.44 ± 0.56 |
In summary, the `preview-concise` diagnostics are ~6% slower than the
stable
output format, increasing the average runtime from 201.2 ms to 214.2 ms.
The
`full` preview diagnostics are much more expensive, taking over 9113.2
ms to
complete, which is ~3x more expensive even than the stable diffs
produced by the
`--diff` flag.
My main takeaways here are:
1. Rendering `Edit`s is much more expensive than rendering the diffs
from `--diff`
2. Constructing `Edit`s actually isn't too bad
### Constructing `Edit`s
I also took a closer look at `Edit` construction by modifying the code
and
repeating the `preview-concise` benchmark and found that the main issue
is
constructing a `SourceFile` for use in the `Edit` rendering. Commenting
out the
`Edit` construction itself has basically no effect:
| Command | Mean [ms] | Min [ms] | Max [ms] | Relative |
|:----------|------------:|---------:|---------:|------------:|
| `stable` | 197.5 ± 1.6 | 195.0 | 200.3 | 1.00 |
| `no-edit` | 208.9 ± 2.2 | 204.8 | 212.2 | 1.06 ± 0.01 |
However, also omitting the source text from the `SourceFile`
construction
resolves the slowdown compared to `stable`. So it seems that copying the
full
source text into a `SourceFile` is the main cause of the slowdown for
non-`full`
diagnostics.
| Command | Mean [ms] | Min [ms] | Max [ms] | Relative |
|:-----------------|------------:|---------:|---------:|------------:|
| `stable` | 202.4 ± 2.9 | 197.6 | 207.9 | 1.00 |
| `no-source-text` | 202.7 ± 3.3 | 196.3 | 209.1 | 1.00 ± 0.02 |
### Rendering diffs
The main difference between `stable-diff` and `preview-full` seems to be
the diffing strategy we use from `similar`. Both versions use the same
algorithm, but in the existing
[`CodeDiff`](https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/blob/main/crates/ruff_linter/src/source_kind.rs#L259)
rendering for the `--diff` flag, we only do line-level diffing, whereas
for `Diagnostic`s we use `TextDiff::iter_inline_changes` to highlight
word-level changes too. Skipping the word diff for `Diagnostic`s closes
most of the gap:
| Command | Mean [s] | Min [s] | Max [s] | Relative |
|:---|---:|---:|---:|---:|
| `stable-diff` | 3.323 ± 0.015 | 3.297 | 3.341 | 1.00 |
| `preview-full` | 3.654 ± 0.019 | 3.618 | 3.682 | 1.10 ± 0.01 |
(In some repeated runs, I've seen as small as a ~5% difference, down
from 10% in the table)
This doesn't actually change any of our snapshots, but it would
obviously change the rendered result in a terminal since we wouldn't
highlight the specific words that changed within a line.
Another much smaller change that we can try is removing the deadline
from the `iter_inline_changes` call. It looks like there's a fair amount
of overhead from the default 500 ms deadline for computing these, and
using `iter_inline_changes(op, None)` (`None` for the optional deadline
argument) improves the runtime quite a bit:
| Command | Mean [s] | Min [s] | Max [s] | Relative |
|:---|---:|---:|---:|---:|
| `stable-diff` | 3.322 ± 0.013 | 3.298 | 3.341 | 1.00 |
| `preview-full` | 5.296 ± 0.030 | 5.251 | 5.366 | 1.59 ± 0.01 |
<hr>
<details><summary>hyperfine command</summary>
```shell
cargo build --release --bin ruff && hyperfine --ignore-failure --warmup 10 --export-markdown /tmp/table.md \
-n stable -n preview-full -n preview-concise -n stable-diff \
"./target/release/ruff format --check ./crates/ruff_linter/resources/test/cpython/ --no-cache" \
"./target/release/ruff format --check ./crates/ruff_linter/resources/test/cpython/ --no-cache --preview --output-format=full" \
"./target/release/ruff format --check ./crates/ruff_linter/resources/test/cpython/ --no-cache --preview --output-format=concise" \
"./target/release/ruff format --check ./crates/ruff_linter/resources/test/cpython/ --no-cache --diff"
```
</details>
</p>
</details>
## Test Plan
Some new CLI tests and manual testing
## Summary
Addresses
https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/pull/20443#discussion_r2381237640 by
factoring out the `match` on the ruff output format in a way that should
be reusable by the formatter.
I didn't think this was going to work at first, but the fact that the
config holds options that apply only to certain output formats works in
our favor here. We can set up a single config for all of the output
formats and then use `try_from` to convert the `OutputFormat` to a
`DiagnosticFormat` later.
## Test Plan
Existing tests, plus a few new ones to make sure relocating the
`SHOW_FIX_SUMMARY` rendering worked, that was untested before. I deleted
a bunch of test code along with the `text` module, but I believe all of
it is now well-covered by the `full` and `concise` tests in `ruff_db`.
I also merged this branch into
https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/pull/20443 locally and made sure that
the API actually helps. `render_diagnostics` dropped in perfectly and
passed the tests there too.
<!--
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 #20570 . In the example, the correct usage had a
bug/issue where in the except block after logging exception, None was
getting returned, which made the linters flag out the code. So adding an
empty raise solves the issue.
## Test Plan
Tested it by building the doc locally.
<!--
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? -->
This PR implements
https://docs.astral.sh/ruff/rules/future-feature-not-defined/ (F407) as
a semantic syntax error.
## Test Plan
<!-- How was it tested? -->
I have written inline tests as directed in #17412
---------
Signed-off-by: 11happy <soni5happy@gmail.com>
Summary
--
This fixes a bug pointed out in #20560 where one of the `pylint`
settings wasn't used in its `Display` implementation.
Test Plan
--
Existing tests with updated snapshots
## Summary
Improve the SIM105 rule message to prevent user confusion about how to
properly use `contextlib.suppress`.
The previous message "Replace with `contextlib.suppress(ValueError)`"
was ambiguous and led users to incorrectly use
`contextlib.suppress(ValueError)` as a statement inside except blocks
instead of replacing the entire try-except-pass block with `with
contextlib.suppress(ValueError):`.
This change makes the message more explicit:
- **Before**: `"Use \`contextlib.suppress({exception})\` instead of
\`try\`-\`except\`-\`pass\`"`
- **After**: `"Replace \`try\`-\`except\`-\`pass\` block with \`with
contextlib.suppress({exception})\`"`
The fix title is also updated to be more specific:
- **Before**: `"Replace with \`contextlib.suppress({exception})\`"`
- **After**: `"Replace \`try\`-\`except\`-\`pass\` with \`with
contextlib.suppress({exception})\`"`
Fixes#20462
## Test Plan
- ✅ All existing SIM105 tests pass with updated snapshots
- ✅ Cargo clippy passes without warnings
- ✅ Full test suite passes
- ✅ The new messages clearly indicate that the entire try-except-pass
block should be replaced with a `with` statement, preventing the misuse
described in the issue
---------
Co-authored-by: Giovani Moutinho <e@mgiovani.dev>
<!--
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? -->
First contribution so please let me know if I've made a mistake
anywhere. This was aimed to fix#19982, it adds the isolation level to
PYI021 to in the same style as the PIE790 rule.
fixes: #19982
## Test Plan
<!-- How was it tested? -->
I added a case to the PYI021.pyi file where the two rules are present as
there wasn't a case with them both interacting, using the minimal
reproducible example that @ntBre created on the issue (I think I got the
`# ERROR` markings wrong, so please let me know how to fix that if I
did).
---------
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
This PR implements
https://docs.astral.sh/ruff/rules/multiple-starred-expressions/ as a
semantic syntax error
## Test Plan
I have added inline tests as directed in #17412
---------
Signed-off-by: 11happy <soni5happy@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Brent Westbrook <36778786+ntBre@users.noreply.github.com>
- Adds test cases exercising file selection by extension with
`--preview` enabled and disabled.
- Adds `INCLUDE_PREVIEW` with file patterns including `*.pyw`.
- In global preview mode, default configuration selects patterns from
`INCLUDE_PREVIEW`.
- Manually tested ruff server with local vscode for both formatting and
linting of a `.pyw` file.
Closes https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/issues/13246
## Summary
Adds a new rule to find and report use of `os.path` or `pathlib.Path` in
async functions.
Issue: #8451
## Test Plan
Using `cargo insta test`
<!--
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#12734
I have started with simply checking if any arguments that are providing
extra values to the log message are calls to `str` or `repr`, as
suggested in the linked issue. There was a concern that this could cause
false positives and the check should be more explicit. I am happy to
look into that if I have some further examples to work with.
If this is the accepted solution then there are more cases to add to the
test and it should possibly also do test for the same behavior via the
`extra` keyword.
<!-- What's the purpose of the change? What does it do, and why? -->
## Test Plan
I have added a new test case and python file to flake8_logging_format
with examples of this anti-pattern.
<!-- How was it tested? -->
Bhuminjay Soni
chiri
Dan Parizher
Wei Lee
Tom Kuson
Brent Westbrook
Micha Reiser
Luca Chiodini
Amethyst Reese
Prakhar Pratyush
Jonas Vacek
Takayuki Maeda
Dylan
Shahar Naveh
Auguste Lalande
wangxiaolei
Hengky Kurniawan
Robsdedude
Loïc Riegel
Paillat
ageorgou
pieterh-oai
liam
Nikolas Hearp
Igor Drokin
Rahul Sahoo
Giovani Moutinho
Ed Cuss
Pieter Cardillo Kwok
renovate[bot]
Gary Yendell