## Summary
<!-- What's the purpose of the change? What does it do, and why? -->
Hi! Currently NumPy Python API is undergoing a cleanup process that will
be delivered in NumPy 2.0 (release is planned for the end of the year).
Most changes are rather simple (renaming, removing or moving a member of
the main namespace to a new place), and they could be flagged/fixed by
an additional ruff rule for numpy (e.g. changing occurrences of
`np.float_` to `np.float64`).
Would you accept such rule?
I named it `NPY201` in the existing group, so people will receive a
heads-up for changes arriving in 2.0 before actually migrating to it.
~~This is still a draft PR.~~ I'm not an expert in rust so if any part
of code can be done better please share!
NumPy 2.0 migration guide:
https://numpy.org/devdocs/numpy_2_0_migration_guide.html
NEP 52: https://numpy.org/neps/nep-0052-python-api-cleanup.html
NumPy cleanup tracking issue:
https://github.com/numpy/numpy/issues/23999
## Test Plan
A unit test is provided that checks all rule's fix cases.
## Summary
LangChain is attempting to use Ruff over their Jupyter notebooks
(https://github.com/langchain-ai/langchain/pull/12677/files), but
running into a bunch of syntax errors, the majority of which come from
our inability to recognize automagic.
If you run this in a cell:
```jupyter
pip install requests
```
Jupyter will automatically treat that as:
```jupyter
%pip install requests
```
We need to ignore cells that use these automagics, since the parser
doesn't understand them. (I guess we could support it in the parser, but
that seems much harder?). The good news is that AFAICT Jupyter doesn't
let you mix automagics with code, so by skipping these cells, we don't
miss out on analyzing any Python code.
## Test Plan
1. `cargo test`
2. Ran over LangChain and verified that there are no more errors
relating to `pip install` automagics.
## Summary
This PR removes the `unicode` flag from the string literal in
`ComparableExpr`. This flag isn't required as all strings are unicode in
Python 3 so `"foo" == u"foo"`.
Closes https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/issues/8076
Follow-up to #8358
Doubles the amount of ecosystem checks we do, adding separate groups for
the stable sections.
We're likely to run into GitHub comment length restrictions if there are
significant deviations. However, it should not be common for changes in
stable and preview to occur at the same time, nor should it be common
for linter and formatter changes to occur at the same time.
Extends https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/pull/8416 activating the
`black-and-ruff` and `black-then-ruff` formatter comparison modes for
ecosystem checks allowing us to compare changes to Black across the
ecosystem.
Previously, the ecosystem checks formatted with the baseline then
formatted again with `--diff` to get the changed files.
Now, the ecosystem checks support a new mode where we:
- Format with the baseline
- Commit the changes
- Reset to the target ref
- Format again
- Check the diff from the baseline commit
This effectively tests Ruff changes on unformatted code rather than
changes in previously formatted code (unless, of course, the project is
already using Ruff).
While this mode is the new default, I've retained the old one for local
checks. The mode can be toggled with `--format-comparison <type>`.
Includes some more aggressive resetting of the GitHub repositories when
cached.
Here, I've also stubbed comparison modes in which `black` is used as the
baseline. While these do nothing here, #8419 adds support.
I tested this with the commit from #8216 and ecosystem changes appear
https://gist.github.com/zanieb/a982ec8c392939043613267474471a6e
Requiring `cargo build` per commit is way too slow. Instead, we use the
production Ruff version. Additionally, Black is replaced with the Ruff
formatter.
**Summary** Simplify CI by ensuring that the source distribution is
always built with the rust version that has been explicitly tested. See
discussion in #8389Closes#8389
---------
Co-authored-by: Zanie <contact@zanie.dev>
Co-authored-by: Stijn de Gooijer <stijndegooijer@gmail.com>
Until https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/issues/8076 is ready, it seems
beneficial to get feedback on preview mode changes.
Tested locally, updated logs to output the flags passed to `ruff` and
verified `--preview` is used.
## Summary
We typically avoid enforcing exclusions if a file was passed to Ruff
directly on the CLI. However, we also allow `--force-exclude`, which
ignores excluded files _even_ if they're passed to Ruff directly. This
is really important for pre-commit, which always passes changed files --
we need to exclude files passed by pre-commit if they're in the
`exclude` lists.
Turns out the new `lint.exclude` and `format.exclude` settings weren't
respecting `--force-exclude`.
Closes https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/issues/8391.
## Summary
By using `set`, we were setting the bracket flag to `false` if another
operator was visited.
Closes https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/issues/8379.
## Test Plan
`cargo test`
## Summary
This PR adds a new `LiteralExpressionRef` which wraps all of the literal
expression nodes in a single enum. This allows for a narrow type when
working exclusively with a literal node. Additionally, it also
implements a `Expr::as_literal_expr` method to return the new enum if
the expression is indeed a literal one.
A few rules have been updated to account for the new enum:
1. `redundant_literal_union`
2. `if_else_block_instead_of_dict_lookup`
3. `magic_value_comparison`
To account for the change in (2), a new `ComparableLiteral` has been
added which can be constructed from the new enum
(`ComparableLiteral::from(<LiteralExpressionRef>)`).
### Open Questions
1. The new `ComparableLiteral` can be exclusively used via the
`LiteralExpressionRef` enum. Should we remove all of the literal
variants from `ComparableExpr` and instead have a single
`ComparableExpr::Literal(ComparableLiteral)` variant instead?
## Test Plan
`cargo test`
## Summary
We were considering the `{` within an f-string to be a left brace, which
caused the "space-after-colon" rule to trigger incorrectly.
Closes https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/issues/8299.
## Summary
Uses `warn_user_once!` instead of `warn!` to ensure that every warning
is shown exactly once, regardless of whether there are duplicates in the
list, or warnings that are raised by multiple configuration files.
Closes#8271.
## Summary
If the value of `shell` wasn't literally `True`, we now show a message
describing it as truthy, rather than the (misleading) `shell=True`
literal in the diagnostic.
Closes https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/issues/8310.
**Summary** Previously, own line comment following after a docstring
followed by newline(s) before the first content statement were treated
as trailing on the docstring and we didn't insert a newline after the
docstring as black would.
Before:
```python
class ModuleBrowser:
"""Browse module classes and functions in IDLE."""
# This class is also the base class for pathbrowser.PathBrowser.
def __init__(self, master, path, *, _htest=False, _utest=False):
pass
```
After:
```python
class ModuleBrowser:
"""Browse module classes and functions in IDLE."""
# This class is also the base class for pathbrowser.PathBrowser.
def __init__(self, master, path, *, _htest=False, _utest=False):
pass
```
I'm not entirely happy about hijacking
`handle_own_line_comment_between_statements`, but i don't know a better
spot to put it.
Fixes#7948
**Test Plan** Fixtures
We previously incorrectly treated byte strings in docstring position as
docstrings because black does so
(https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/pull/8283#discussion_r1375682931,
https://github.com/psf/black/issues/4002), even CPython doesn't
recognize them:
```console
$ python3.12
Python 3.12.0 (main, Oct 6 2023, 17:57:44) [GCC 11.4.0] on linux
Type "help", "copyright", "credits" or "license" for more information.
>>> def f():
... b""" a"""
...
>>> print(str(f.__doc__))
None
```
<!--
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?
-->
