## Summary
This PR updates the flake8-self license from Freely Distributable to the
MIT License to match the upstream license, which was recently updated.
f5fc507515/LICENSE
## Summary
If a function has no parameters (and no comments within the parameters'
`()`), we're supposed to wrap the return annotation _whenever_ it
breaks. However, our `empty_parameters` test didn't properly account for
the case in which the parameters include a newline (but no other
content), like:
```python
def get_dashboards_hierarchy(
) -> Dict[Type['BaseDashboard'], List[Type['BaseDashboard']]]:
"""Get hierarchy of dashboards classes.
Returns:
Dict of dashboards classes.
"""
dashboards_hierarchy = {}
```
This PR fixes that detection. Instead of lexing, it now checks if the
parameters itself is empty (or if it contains comments).
Closes https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/issues/7457.
## Summary
## 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 moves the `ResolverSettings` and `Settings` struct to `ruff_workspace`. `LinterSettings` remains in `ruff_linter` because it gets passed to lint rules, the `Checker` etc.
## Test Plan
`cargo test`
## 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`
## 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 a `ResolverSettings` struct that holds all the resolver-relevant fields (uninteresting for the `Formatter` or `Linter`). This will allow us to move the `ResolverSettings` out of `ruff_linter` further up in the stack.
## Test Plan
`cargo test`
(I'll to more extensive testing at the top of this stack)
## Summary
This PR fixes the way NoQA range is inserted to the `NoqaMapping`.
Previously, the way the mapping insertion logic worked was as follows:
1. If the range which is to be inserted _touched_ the previous range, meaning
that the end of the previous range was the same as the start of the new
range, then the new range was added in addition to the previous range.
2. Else, if the new range intersected the previous range, then the previous
range was replaced with the new _intersection_ of the two ranges.
The problem with this logic is that it does not work for the following case:
```python
assert foo, \
"""multi-line
string"""
```
Now, the comments cannot be added to the same line which ends with a continuation
character. So, the `NoQA` directive has to be added to the next line. But, the
next line is also a triple-quoted string, so the `NoQA` directive for that line
needs to be added to the next line. This creates a **union** pattern instead of an
**intersection** pattern.
But, only union doesn't suffice because (1) means that for the edge case where
the range touch only at the end, the union won't take place.
### Solution
1. Replace '<=' with '<' to have a _strict_ insertion case
2. Use union instead of intersection
## Test Plan
Add a new test case. Run the test suite to ensure that nothing is broken.
### Integration
1. Make a `test.py` file with the following contents:
```python
assert foo, \
"""multi-line
string"""
```
2. Run the following command:
```console
$ cargo run --bin ruff -- check --isolated --no-cache --select=F821 test.py
/Users/dhruv/playground/ruff/fstring.py:1:8: F821 Undefined name `foo`
Found 1 error.
```
3. Use `--add-noqa`:
```console
$ cargo run --bin ruff -- check --isolated --no-cache --select=F821 --add-noqa test.py
Added 1 noqa directive.
```
4. Check that the NoQA directive was added in the correct position:
```python
assert foo, \
"""multi-line
string""" # noqa: F821
```
5. Run the `check` command to ensure that the NoQA directive is respected:
```console
$ cargo run --bin ruff -- check --isolated --no-cache --select=F821 test.py
```
fixes: #7530
## Summary
Implement
[`no-ignored-enumerate-items`](https://github.com/dosisod/refurb/blob/master/refurb/checks/builtin/no_ignored_enumerate.py)
as `unnecessary-enumerate` (`FURB148`).
The auto-fix considers if a `start` argument is passed to the
`enumerate()` function. If only the index is used, then the suggested
fix is to pass the `start` value to the `range()` function. So,
```python
for i, _ in enumerate(xs, 1):
...
```
becomes
```python
for i in range(1, len(xs)):
...
```
If the index is ignored and only the value is ignored, and if a start
value greater than zero is passed to `enumerate()`, the rule doesn't
produce a suggestion. I couldn't find a unanimously accepted best way to
iterate over a collection whilst skipping the first n elements. The rule
still triggers, however.
Related to #1348.
## Test Plan
`cargo test`
---------
Co-authored-by: Dhruv Manilawala <dhruvmanila@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Charlie Marsh <charlie.r.marsh@gmail.com>
**Summary** Instead of emitting a bogus token per char, we now only emit
on single last bogus token. This leads to much more concise output.
**Test Plan** Updated fixtures
konstin
dependabot[bot]
Micha Reiser
Charlie Marsh
Mahesh Saripalli
Dhruv Manilawala
Mathieu Kniewallner
Tom Kuson
Valeriy Savchenko