## Summary
Builds on #6170 to break `global` and `nonlocal` statements, such that
we get:
```python
def f():
global \
analyze_featuremap_layer, \
analyze_featuremapcompression_layer, \
analyze_latencies_post, \
analyze_motions_layer, \
analyze_size_model
```
Instead of:
```python
def f():
global analyze_featuremap_layer, analyze_featuremapcompression_layer, analyze_latencies_post, analyze_motions_layer, analyze_size_model
```
Notably, we avoid applying this formatting if the statement ends in a
comment. Otherwise, the comment would _need_ to be placed after the last
item, like:
```python
def f():
global \
analyze_featuremap_layer, \
analyze_featuremapcompression_layer, \
analyze_latencies_post, \
analyze_motions_layer, \
analyze_size_model # noqa
```
To me, this seems wrong (and would break the `# noqa` comment). Ideally,
the items would be parenthesized, and the comment would be on the inner
parenthesis, like:
```python
def f():
global ( # noqa
analyze_featuremap_layer,
analyze_featuremapcompression_layer,
analyze_latencies_post,
analyze_motions_layer,
analyze_size_model
)
```
But that's not valid syntax.
## Summary
Checks for the presence of redundant `Literal` types and builtin super
types in an union. See [original
source](2a86db8271/pyi.py (L1261)).
This implementation has a couple of differences from the original. The
first one is, we support the `complex` and `float` builtin types. The
second is, when reporting diagnostic for a `Literal` with multiple
members of the same type, we print the entire `Literal` while `flak8`
only prints the `Literal` with its first member.
For example:
```python
from typing import Literal
x: Literal[1, 2] | int
```
Ruff will show `Literal[1, 2]` while flake8 only shows `Literal[1]`.
```shell
$ ruff crates/ruff/resources/test/fixtures/flake8_pyi/PYI051.pyi
crates/ruff/resources/test/fixtures/flake8_pyi/PYI051.pyi:4:18: PYI051 `Literal["foo"]` is redundant in an union with `str`
crates/ruff/resources/test/fixtures/flake8_pyi/PYI051.pyi:5:37: PYI051 `Literal[b"bar", b"foo"]` is redundant in an union with `bytes`
crates/ruff/resources/test/fixtures/flake8_pyi/PYI051.pyi:6:37: PYI051 `Literal[5]` is redundant in an union with `int`
crates/ruff/resources/test/fixtures/flake8_pyi/PYI051.pyi:6:67: PYI051 `Literal["foo"]` is redundant in an union with `str`
crates/ruff/resources/test/fixtures/flake8_pyi/PYI051.pyi:7:37: PYI051 `Literal[b"str_bytes"]` is redundant in an union with `bytes`
crates/ruff/resources/test/fixtures/flake8_pyi/PYI051.pyi:7:51: PYI051 `Literal[42]` is redundant in an union with `int`
crates/ruff/resources/test/fixtures/flake8_pyi/PYI051.pyi:9:31: PYI051 `Literal[1J]` is redundant in an union with `complex`
crates/ruff/resources/test/fixtures/flake8_pyi/PYI051.pyi:9:53: PYI051 `Literal[3.14]` is redundant in an union with `float`
Found 8 errors.
```
```shell
$ flake8 crates/ruff/resources/test/fixtures/flake8_pyi/PYI051.pyi
crates/ruff/resources/test/fixtures/flake8_pyi/PYI051.pyi:4:18: Y051 "Literal['foo']" is redundant in a union with "str"
crates/ruff/resources/test/fixtures/flake8_pyi/PYI051.pyi:5:37: Y051 "Literal[b'bar']" is redundant in a union with "bytes"
crates/ruff/resources/test/fixtures/flake8_pyi/PYI051.pyi:6:37: Y051 "Literal[5]" is redundant in a unionwith "int"
crates/ruff/resources/test/fixtures/flake8_pyi/PYI051.pyi:6:67: Y051 "Literal['foo']" is redundant in a union with "str"
crates/ruff/resources/test/fixtures/flake8_pyi/PYI051.pyi:7:37: Y051 "Literal[b'str_bytes']" is redundantin a union with "bytes"
crates/ruff/resources/test/fixtures/flake8_pyi/PYI051.pyi:7:51: Y051 "Literal[42]" is redundant in a union with "int"
```
While implementing this rule, I found a bug in the `is_unchecked_union`
check. This is the new check.
1ab86bad35/crates/ruff/src/checkers/ast/analyze/expression.rs (L85-L102)
The purpose of the check was to prevent rules from navigating through
nested `Union`s, as they already handle nested `Union`s. The way it was
implemented, this was not happening, the rules were getting executed
more than one time and sometimes were receiving expressions that were
not `Union`. For example, with the following code:
```python
typing.Union[Literal[5], int, typing.Union[Literal["foo"], str]]
```
The rules were receiving the expressions in the following order:
- `typing.Union[Literal[5], int, typing.Union[Literal["foo"], str]]`
- `Literal[5]`
- `typing.Union[Literal["foo"], str]]`
This was causing `PYI030` to report redundant information, for example:
```python
typing.Union[Literal[5], int, typing.Union[Literal["foo"],
Literal["bar"]]]
```
This is the `PYI030` output for this code:
```shell
PYI030 Multiple literal members in a union. Use a single literal, e.g. `Literal[5, "foo", "bar"]`
YI030 Multiple literal members in a union. Use a single literal, e.g.`Literal[5, "foo"]`
```
If I haven't misinterpreted the rule, that looks incorrect. I didn't
have the time to check the `PYI016` rule.
The last thing is, I couldn't find a reason for the "Why is this bad?"
section for `PYI051`.
Ref: #848
## Test Plan
Snapshots and manual runs of flake8.
\
## Summary
Previously, the ruff formatter was removing the star argument of
`lambda` expressions when formatting.
Given the following code snippet
```python
lambda *a: ()
lambda **b: ()
```
it would be formatted to
```python
lambda: ()
lambda: ()
```
We fix this by checking for the presence of `args`, `vararg` or `kwarg`
in the `lambda` expression, before we were only checking for the
presence of `args`.
Fixes#5894
## Test Plan
Add new tests cases.
---------
Co-authored-by: Charlie Marsh <charlie.r.marsh@gmail.com>
## Summary
Similar to #6279, moving some helpers onto the struct in the name of
reducing the number of random undiscoverable utilities we have in
`helpers.rs`.
Most of the churn is migrating rules to take `ast::ExprCall` instead of
the spread call arguments.
## Test Plan
`cargo test`
## Summary
This PR removes a now-unnecessary abstraction from `helper.rs`
(`CallArguments`), in favor of adding methods to `Arguments` directly,
which helps with discoverability.
## Summary
This PR boxes the `TypeParams` and `Arguments` fields on the class
definition node. These fields are optional and often emitted, and given
that class definition is our largest enum variant, we pay the cost of
including them for every statement in the AST. Boxing these types
reduces the statement size by 40 bytes, which seems like a good tradeoff
given how infrequently these are accessed.
## Test Plan
Need to benchmark, but no behavior changes.
## Summary
This PR leverages the `Arguments` AST node introduced in #6259 in the
formatter, which ensures that we correctly handle trailing comments in
calls, like:
```python
f(
1,
# comment
)
pass
```
(Previously, this was treated as a leading comment on `pass`.)
This also allows us to unify the argument handling across calls and
class definitions.
## Test Plan
A bunch of new fixture tests, plus improved Black compatibility.
## Summary
Similar to #6259, this PR adds a `TypeParams` node to the AST, to
capture the list of type parameters with their surrounding brackets.
If a statement lacks type parameters, the `type_params` field will be
`None`.
## Summary
This PR adds a new `Arguments` AST node, which we can use for function
calls and class definitions.
The `Arguments` node spans from the left (open) to right (close)
parentheses inclusive.
In the case of classes, the `Arguments` is an option, to differentiate
between:
```python
# None
class C: ...
# Some, with empty vectors
class C(): ...
```
In this PR, we don't really leverage this change (except that a few
rules get much simpler, since we don't need to lex to find the start and
end ranges of the parentheses, e.g.,
`crates/ruff/src/rules/pyupgrade/rules/lru_cache_without_parameters.rs`,
`crates/ruff/src/rules/pyupgrade/rules/unnecessary_class_parentheses.rs`).
In future PRs, this will be especially helpful for the formatter, since
we can track comments enclosed on the node itself.
## Test Plan
`cargo test`
<!--
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? -->
Before:
<img width="1031" alt="Screen Shot 2023-08-02 at 15 57 10"
src="https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/assets/17039389/171a21d5-01a5-4aa5-8079-4e7f8a59ade8">
After:
<img width="1031" alt="Screen Shot 2023-08-02 at 15 58 03"
src="https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/assets/17039389/afd1b9b7-89e0-4e38-a4a6-e3255b62f021">
## Test Plan
<!-- How was it tested? -->
Manual inspection
## Summary
This PR renames...
- `Parameter#arg` to `Parameter#name`
- `ParameterWithDefault#def` to `ParameterWithDefault#parameter` (such
that `ParameterWithDefault` has a `default` and a `parameter`)
## Test Plan
`cargo test`
## Summary
This PR renames a few AST nodes for clarity:
- `Arguments` is now `Parameters`
- `Arg` is now `Parameter`
- `ArgWithDefault` is now `ParameterWithDefault`
For now, the attribute names that reference `Parameters` directly are
changed (e.g., on `StmtFunctionDef`), but the attributes on `Parameters`
itself are not (e.g., `vararg`). We may revisit that decision in the
future.
For context, the AST node formerly known as `Arguments` is used in
function definitions. Formally (outside of the Python context),
"arguments" typically refers to "the values passed to a function", while
"parameters" typically refers to "the variables used in a function
definition". E.g., if you Google "arguments vs parameters", you'll get
some explanation like:
> A parameter is a variable in a function definition. It is a
placeholder and hence does not have a concrete value. An argument is a
value passed during function invocation.
We're thus deviating from Python's nomenclature in favor of a scheme
that we find to be more precise.
## Summary
Black allows up to one blank line _before_ a class docstring, and
enforces one blank line _after_ a class docstring. This PR implements
that handling. The cases in
`crates/ruff_python_formatter/resources/test/fixtures/ruff/statement/class_definition.py`
match Black identically.
## Summary
This PR ensures that if a function or class is the first statement in a
nested suite that _isn't_ a function or class body, we insert a leading
newline.
For example, given:
```python
def f():
if True:
def register_type():
pass
```
We _want_ to preserve the newline, whereas today, we remove it.
Note that this only applies when the function or class doesn't have any
leading comments.
Closes https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/issues/6066.
<!--
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 PR removes the `Interactive` and `FunctionType` parser modes that are unused by ruff
<!-- What's the purpose of the change? What does it do, and why? -->
## Test Plan
`cargo 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
This PR removes the `type_comment` field which our parser doesn't support.
<!-- What's the purpose of the change? What does it do, and why? -->
## Test Plan
`cargo 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
This PR removes the type ignore node from the AST because our parser doesn't support it, and just having it around is confusing.
<!-- What's the purpose of the change? What does it do, and why? -->
## Test Plan
`cargo build`
<!-- How was it tested? -->
**Summary** Allow passing any node to `CommentPlacement::{leading,
trailing, dangling}` without manually converting. Conversely, Restrict
the comment to the only type we actually pass.
**Test Plan** No changes.
## Summary
Previously, given:
```python
a = \
5;
```
When detecting continuations starting at the offset of the `;`, we'd
flag the previous line as a continuation. We should only flag a
continuation if there isn't leading content prior to the offset.
Closes https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/issues/6214
## Summary
This PR moves the "insert empty lines" behavior out of
`JoinNodesBuilder` and into the `Suite` formatter. I find it a little
confusing that the logic is split between those two formatters right
now, and since this is _only_ used in that one place, IMO it is a bit
simpler to just inline it and use a single approach to tracking state
(right now, both are stateful).
The only other place this was used was for decorators. As a side effect,
we now remove blank lines in both of these cases, which is a known but
intentional deviation from Black (which preserves the empty line before
the comment in the first case):
```python
@foo
# Hello
@bar
def baz():
pass
@foo
@bar
def baz():
pass
```
## Summary
Very subtle bug related to the AST traversal. Given:
```python
from __future__ import annotations
from logging import getLogger
__all__ = ("getLogger",)
def foo() -> None:
pass
```
We end up visiting the `-> None` annotation, then reusing the state
snapshot when we go to visit the `__all__` exports, so when we visit
`"getLogger"`, we think we're inside of a deferred type annotation.
This PR changes all the deferred visitors to snapshot and restore the
state, which is a lot safer -- that way, the visitors avoid modifying
the current visitor state. (Previously, they implicitly left the visitor
state set to the state of the _last_ thing they visited.)
Closes https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/issues/6207.
**Summary** This includes two changes:
* Allow setting `-v` in `ruff_dev`, using the `ruff_cli` implementation
* `debug!` which ruff configuration strategy was used
This is a byproduct of debugging #6187.
**Test Plan** n/a
**Summary** This prevents us from turning `r'''\""'''` into
`r"""\"""""`, which is invalid syntax.
This PR fixes CI, which is currently broken on main (in a way that still
passes on linter PRs and allows merging formatter PRs, but it's bad to
have a job be red). Once merged, i'll make the formatted ecosystem
checks a required check.
**Test Plan** Added a regression test.
Charlie Marsh
Victor Hugo Gomes
Harutaka Kawamura
Ran Benita
konsti
Micha Reiser
David Szotten
Konrad Listwan-Ciesielski