Previously we tested the resolve_codes helper function directly.
Since we want to rewrite our resolution logic in the next commit,
this commit changes the tests to test the more high-level From impl.
This PR fixes two related issues with using isort on files using tabs for indentation:
- Multiline imports are never considered correctly formatted, since the comparison with the generated code will always fail.
- Using autofix generates code that can have mixed indentation in the same line, for imports that are within nested blocks.
Previously Linter::parse_code("E401") returned
(Linter::Pycodestyle, "401") ... after this commit it returns
(Linter::Pycodestyle, "E401") instead, which is important
for the future implementation of the many-to-many mapping.
(The second value of the tuple isn't used currently.)
Fairly mechanical. Did a few of the simple cases manually to make sure things were working, and I think the rest will be easily achievable via a quick `fastmod` command.
ref #1871
I think we've never run into this case, since it's rare to import `*` from a module _and_ import some other member explicitly. But we were deviating from `isort` by placing the `*` after other members, rather than up-top.
Closes#2318.
`RUF100` does not take into account a rule ignored for a file via a `per-file-ignores` configuration. To see this, try the following pyproject.toml:
```toml
[tool.ruff.per-file-ignores]
"test.py" = ["F401"]
```
and this test.py file:
```python
import itertools # noqa: F401
```
Running `ruff --extend-select RUF100 test.py`, we should expect to get this error:
```
test.py:1:19: RUF100 Unused `noqa` directive (unused: `F401`)
```
The issue is that the per-file-ignores diagnostics are filtered out after the noqa checks, rather than before.
Fixes a regression introduced in eda2be6350 (but not yet released to users). (`-v` is a real flag, but it's an alias for `--verbose`, not `--version`.)
Closes#2299.
We probably want to introduce multiple explain subcommands and
overloading `explain` to explain it all seems like a bad idea.
We may want to introduce a subcommand to explain config options and
config options may end up having the same name as their rules, e.g. the
current `banned-api` is both a rule name (although not yet exposed to
the user) and a config option.
The idea is:
* `ruff rule` lists all rules supported by ruff
* `ruff rule <code>` explains a specific rule
* `ruff linter` lists all linters supported by ruff
* `ruff linter <name>` lists all rules/options supported by a specific linter
(After this commit only the 2nd case is implemented.)
