## Summary
Given:
```python
if (
x
:=
( # 4
y # 5
) # 6
):
pass
```
It turns out the parser ended the range of the `NamedExpr` at the end of
`y`, rather than the end of the parenthesis that encloses `y`. This just
seems like a bug -- the range should be from the start of the name on
the left, to the end of the parenthesized node on the right.
## Test Plan
`cargo test`
Closes https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/issues/6442
Python string formatting like `"hello {place}".format(place="world")`
supports format specifications for replaced content such as `"hello
{place:>10}".format(place="world")` which will align the text to the
right in a container filled up to ten characters.
Ruff parses formatted strings into `FormatPart`s each of which is either
a `Field` (content in `{...}`) or a `Literal` (the normal content).
Fields are parsed into name and format specifier sections (we'll ignore
conversion specifiers for now).
There are a myriad of specifiers that can be used in a `FormatSpec`.
Unfortunately for linters, the specifier values can be dynamically set.
For example, `"hello {place:{align}{width}}".format(place="world",
align=">", width=10)` and `"hello {place:{fmt}}".format(place="world",
fmt=">10")` will yield the same string as before but variables can be
used to determine the formatting. In this case, when parsing the format
specifier we can't know what _kind_ of specifier is being used as their
meaning is determined by both position and value.
Ruff does not support nested replacements and our current data model
does not support the concept. Here the data model is updated to support
this concept, although linting of specifications with replacements will
be inherently limited. We could split format specifications into two
types, one without any replacements that we can perform lints with and
one with replacements that we cannot inspect. However, it seems
excessive to drop all parsing of format specifiers due to the presence
of a replacement. Instead, I've opted to parse replacements eagerly and
ignore their possible effect on other format specifiers. This will allow
us to retain a simple interface for `FormatSpec` and most syntax checks.
We may need to add some handling to relax errors if a replacement was
seen previously.
It's worth noting that the nested replacement _can_ also include a
format specification although it may fail at runtime if you produce an
invalid outer format specification. For example, `"hello
{place:{fmt:<2}}".format(place="world", fmt=">10")` is valid so we need
to represent each nested replacement as a full `FormatPart`.
## Test plan
Adding unit tests for `FormatSpec` parsing and snapshots for PLE1300
## Summary
<!-- What's the purpose of the change? What does it do, and why? -->
Support glob patterns for `raises_require_match_for` and
`raises_require_match_for`. Resolve#6473
## Test Plan
New tests + existing tests
## Summary
No behavior changes, but these need some refactoring to support
https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/pull/6575 (namely, they need to take
the `ast::ExprCompare` or similar node instead of the attribute fields),
and I don't want to muddy that PR.
## Test Plan
`cargo test`
## Summary
Ensures we avoid cases like:
```python
x.values = 1
```
Since Pandas doesn't even expose a setter for that. We also avoid cases
like:
```python
print(self.values)
```
Since it's overwhelming likely to be a false positive.
Closes https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/issues/6630.
## Test Plan
`cargo test`
## Summary
When running Ruff from stdin, we were always falling back to the default
source type, even if the user specified a path (as is the case when
running from the LSP). This PR wires up the source type inference, which
means we now get the expected result when checking `.pyi` and `.ipynb`
files.
Closes#6627.
## Test Plan
Verified that `cat
crates/ruff/resources/test/fixtures/jupyter/valid.ipynb | cargo run -p
ruff_cli -- --force-exclude --no-cache --no-fix --isolated --select ALL
--stdin-filename foo.ipynb -` yielded the expected results (and differs
from the errors you get if you omit the filename).
Verified that `cat foo.pyi | cargo run -p ruff_cli -- --force-exclude
--no-cache --no-fix --format json --isolated --select TCH
--stdin-filename path/to/foo.pyi -` yielded no errors.
In https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/pull/6616 we are adding support for
nested replacements in format specifiers which makes actually formatting
strings infeasible without a great deal of complexity. Since we're not
using these functions (they just exist for runtime use in RustPython),
we can just remove them.
## Summary
In #6387, we accidentally added `git -C "$dir/django" checkout
95e4d6b81312fdd9f8ebf3385be1c1331168b5cf` as the transformers checkout
(duplicated line from the Django case). This PR fixes the SHA, and
spaces out the cases to make it more visible. I _think_ the net effect
here is that we've been formatting `main` on transformers, rather than
the SHA?
## Summary
Closes https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/issues/6384, although I think
the issue was fixed already on main, for the most part.
The linked issue is around formatting expressions like:
```python
def test():
(
yield
#comment 1
* # comment 2
# comment 3
test # comment 4
)
```
On main, prior to this PR, we now format like:
```python
def test():
(
yield (
# comment 1
# comment 2
# comment 3
*test
) # comment 4
)
```
Which strikes me as reasonable. (We can't test this, since it's a syntax
error after for our parser, despite being a syntax error in both cases
from CPython's perspective.)
Meanwhile, Black does:
```python
def test():
(
yield
# comment 1
* # comment 2
# comment 3
test # comment 4
)
```
So our formatting differs in that we move comments between the star and
the expression above the star.
As of this PR, we also support formatting this input, which is valid:
```python
def test():
(
yield
#comment 1
* # comment 2
# comment 3
test, # comment 4
1
)
```
Like:
```python
def test():
(
yield (
# comment 1
(
# comment 2
# comment 3
*test, # comment 4
1,
)
)
)
```
There were two fixes here: (1) marking starred comments as dangling and
formatting them properly; and (2) supporting parenthesized comments for
tuples that don't contain their own parentheses, as is often the case
for yielded tuples (previously, we hit a debug assert).
Note that this diff
## Test Plan
cargo test
## Summary
Allows for proper lexing of tokens like `->`.
The main challenge is to ensure that our forward and backwards
representations are the same for cases like `===`. Specifically, we want
that to lex as `==` followed by `=` regardless of whether it's a
forwards or backwards lex. To do so, we identify the range of the
sequential characters (the full span of `===`), lex it forwards, then
return the last token.
## Test Plan
`cargo test`
## Summary
This PR adds support for parenthesized comments. A parenthesized comment
is a comment that appears within a parenthesis, but not within the range
of the expression enclosed by the parenthesis. For example, the comment
here is a parenthesized comment:
```python
if (
# comment
True
):
...
```
The parentheses enclose the `True`, but the range of `True` doesn’t
include the `# comment`.
There are at least two problems associated with parenthesized comments:
(1) associating the comment with the correct (i.e., enclosed) node; and
(2) formatting the comment correctly, once it has been associated with
the enclosed node.
The solution proposed here for (1) is to search for parentheses between
preceding and following node, and use open and close parentheses to
break ties, rather than always assigning to the preceding node.
For (2), we handle these special parenthesized comments in `FormatExpr`.
The biggest risk with this approach is that we forget some codepath that
force-disables parenthesization (by passing in `Parentheses::Never`).
I've audited all usages of that enum and added additional handling +
test coverage for such cases.
Closes https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/issues/6390.
## Test Plan
`cargo test` with new cases.
Before:
| project | similarity index |
|--------------|------------------|
| build | 0.75623 |
| cpython | 0.75472 |
| django | 0.99804 |
| transformers | 0.99618 |
| typeshed | 0.74233 |
| warehouse | 0.99601 |
| zulip | 0.99727 |
After:
| project | similarity index |
|--------------|------------------|
| build | 0.75623 |
| cpython | 0.75472 |
| django | 0.99804 |
| transformers | 0.99618 |
| typeshed | 0.74237 |
| warehouse | 0.99601 |
| zulip | 0.99727 |
## Summary
Unlike other statements, Black always adds a trailing comma if an
import-from statement breaks with a single import member. I believe this
is for compatibility with isort -- see
09f5ee3a19,
https://github.com/psf/black/issues/127, or
66648c528a/src/black/linegen.py (L1452)
for the current version.
## Test Plan
`cargo test`, notice that a big chunk of the compatibility suite is
removed.
Before:
| project | similarity index |
|--------------|------------------|
| cpython | 0.75472 |
| django | 0.99804 |
| transformers | 0.99618 |
| twine | 0.99876 |
| typeshed | 0.74233 |
| warehouse | 0.99601 |
| zulip | 0.99727 |
After:
| project | similarity index |
|--------------|------------------|
| cpython | 0.75472 |
| django | 0.99804 |
| transformers | 0.99618 |
| twine | 0.99876 |
| typeshed | 0.74260 |
| warehouse | 0.99601 |
| zulip | 0.99727 |
## Summary
Hi! This is my first PR to `ruff` and thanks for this amazing project.
While I am working on my project, I need to set different rules for my
`test/` folder and the main `src` package.
It's not immediately obvious that the
[`tool.ruff.per-file-ignores`](https://beta.ruff.rs/docs/settings/#per-file-ignores)
support regular expression. It is useful to set rules on directory
level. The PR add a simple example to make it clear this support regex.
## Summary
Instead, we set an `is_star` flag on `Stmt::Try`. This is similar to the
pattern we've migrated towards for `Stmt::For` (removing
`Stmt::AsyncFor`) and friends. While these are significant differences
for an interpreter, we tend to handle these cases identically or nearly
identically.
## Test Plan
`cargo test`
