## Summary
This allows us to fix usages like:
```python
from pandas import DataFrame
def baz() -> DataFrame:
...
```
By quoting the `DataFrame` in `-> DataFrame`. Without quotes, moving
`from pandas import DataFrame` into an `if TYPE_CHECKING:` block will
fail at runtime, since Python tries to evaluate the annotation to add it
to the function's `__annotations__`.
Unfortunately, this does require us to split our "annotation kind" flags
into three categories, rather than two:
- `typing-only`: The annotation is only evaluated at type-checking-time.
- `runtime-evaluated`: Python will evaluate the annotation at runtime
(like above) -- but we're willing to quote it.
- `runtime-required`: Python will evaluate the annotation at runtime
(like above), and some library (like Pydantic) needs it to be available
at runtime, so we _can't_ quote it.
This functionality is gated behind a setting
(`flake8-type-checking.quote-annotations`).
Closes https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/issues/5559.
Hides hints about unsafe fixes when they are disabled e.g. with
`--no-unsafe-fixes` or `unsafe-fixes = false`. By default, unsafe fix
hints are still displayed. This seems like a nice way to remove the nag
for users who have chosen not to apply unsafe fixes.
Inspired by comment at
https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/issues/9063#issuecomment-1850289675
## Summary
Closes#1567.
Add both `length-sort` and `length-sort-straight` settings for isort.
Here are a few notable points:
- The length is determined using the
[`unicode_width`](https://crates.io/crates/unicode-width) crate, i.e. we
are talking about displayed length (this is explicitly mentioned in the
description of the setting)
- The dots are taken into account in the length to be compatible with
the original isort
- I had to reorder a few fields of the module key struct for it all to
make sense (notably the `force_to_top` field is now the first one)
## Test Plan
I added tests for the following cases:
- Basic tests for length-sort with ASCII characters only
- Tests with non-ASCII characters
- Tests with relative imports
- Tests for length-sort-straight
closes#8732
I noticed that the reference to the setting in the rule docs doesn't
work, but there seem to be something wrong with pylint settings in
general in the docs - the "For related settings, see ...." is also
missing there.
# Summary
This setting behaves similarly to the ``from_first`` setting in isort
upstream, and sorts "from X import Y" type imports before straight
imports.
Like the other PR I added, happy to refactor if this is better in
another form.
Fixes#8662
# Test plan
I've added a unit test, and ran this on a large codebase that relies on
this setting in isort to verify it doesn't have unexpected side effects.
<!--
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
Adds the Pylint rule E1132 to check for repeated keyword arguments in a
function call.
## Test Plan
Tested via the included unit tests and manual spot checking.
## Summary
Implements
[FURB136](https://github.com/dosisod/refurb/blob/master/docs/checks.md#furb136-use-min-max)
that checks for `if` expressions that can be replaced with `min()` or
`max()` calls. See issue #1348 for more information.
This implementation diverges from Refurb's original implementation by
retaining the order of equal values. For example, Refurb suggest that
the following expressions:
```python
highest_score1 = score1 if score1 > score2 else score2
highest_score2 = score1 if score1 >= score2 else score2
```
should be to rewritten as:
```python
highest_score1 = max(score1, score2)
highest_score2 = max(score1, score2)
```
whereas this implementation provides more correct alternatives:
```python
highest_score1 = max(score2, score1)
highest_score2 = max(score1, score2)
```
## Test Plan
Unit test checks all eight possibilities.
## Summary
This adds a ``no-sections`` option for isort in the linter, similar to
the ``no_sections`` option that exists in upstream isort
(https://pycqa.github.io/isort/docs/configuration/options.html#no-sections)
This option puts all imports except for ``__future__`` into the same
section, and is mostly used by monorepos.
I've taken a bit of a leap in assuming that ruff wants to support the
exact same option; more than happy to refactor if you'd prefer a
different way of setting this up.
Fixes#8653
## Test Plan
I've added a test and have run it on a large Python codebase that uses
isort with --no-sections. The option is disabled by default.
When using the autofixer for `Q000` it does not remove the backslashes
from quotes that no longer need escaping.
This new rule checks for such backslashes (regardless whether they come
from the autofixer or not) and can remove them.
fixes#8617
## Summary
This fixes#2606 by moving where we apply the convention ignores --
instead of applying that at the very end, e track, we now track which
rules have been specifically enabled (via `Specificity::Rule`). If they
have, then we do *not* apply the docstring overrides at the end.
## Test Plan
Added unit tests to `ruff_workspace` and an integration test to
`ruff_cli`
## Summary
This brings ruff's behavior in line with what `pep8-naming` already does
and thus closes#8397.
I had initially implemented this to look at the last segment of a dotted
path only when the entry in the `*-decorators` setting started with a
`.`, but in the end I thought it's better to remain consistent w/
`pep8-naming` and doing a match against the last segment of the
decorator name in any case.
If you prefer to diverge from this in favor of less ambiguity in the
configuration let me know and I'll change it so you would need to put
e.g. `.expression` in the `classmethod-decorators` list.
## Test Plan
Tested against the file in the issue linked below, plus the new testcase
added in this PR.
## Summary
Implement
[`no-is-type-none`](https://github.com/dosisod/refurb/blob/master/refurb/checks/builtin/no_is_type_none.py)
as `type-none-comparison` (`FURB169`).
Auto-fixes comparisons that use `type` to compare the type of an object
to `type(None)` to a `None` identity check. For example,
```python
type(foo) is type(None)
```
becomes
```python
foo is None
```
Related to #1348.
## Test Plan
`cargo test`
## Summary
Adds `TRIO105` from the [flake8-trio
plugin](https://github.com/Zac-HD/flake8-trio). The `MethodName` logic
mirrors that of `TRIO100` to stay consistent within the plugin.
It is at 95% parity with the exception of upstream also checking for a
slightly more complex scenario where a call to `start()` on a
`trio.Nursery` context should also be immediately awaited. Upstream
plugin appears to just check for anything named `nursery` judging from
[the relevant issue](https://github.com/Zac-HD/flake8-trio/issues/56).
Unsure if we want to do so something similar or, alternatively, if there
is some capability in ruff to check for calls made on this context some
other way
## Test Plan
Added a new fixture, based on [the one from upstream
plugin](https://github.com/Zac-HD/flake8-trio/blob/main/tests/eval_files/trio105.py)
## Issue link
Refers: https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/issues/8451
## 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
Implements pylint C0415 (import-outside-toplevel) — imports should be at
the top level of a file.
The great debate I had on this implementation is whether "top-level" is
one word or two (`toplevel` or `top_level`). I opted for 2 because that
seemed to be how it is used in the codebase but the rule string itself
uses one-word "toplevel." 🤷 I'd be happy to change it as desired.
I suppose this could be auto-fixed by moving the import to the
top-level, but it seems likely that the author's intent was to actually
import this dynamically, so I view the main point of this rule is to
force some sort of explanation, and auto-fixing might be annoying.
For reference, this is what "pylint" reports:
```
> pylint crates/ruff/resources/test/fixtures/pylint/import_outside_top_level.py
************* Module import_outside_top_level
...
crates/ruff/resources/test/fixtures/pylint/import_outside_top_level.py:4:4: C0415: Import outside toplevel (string) (import-outside-toplevel)
```
ruff would now report:
```
import_outside_top_level.py:4:5: PLC0415 `import` should be used only at the top level of a file
|
3 | def import_outside_top_level():
4 | import string # [import-outside-toplevel]
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^ PLC0415
|
```
Contributes to https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/issues/970.
## Test Plan
Snapshot test.
## Summary
Remove wrong note on `tool.ruff.format` `exclude` option from
documentation which is referencing `extend-exclude` even if it's not
relevant for the formatter options (`exclude` is additive). See #8301
## Test Plan
N/A (Docs change)
## Summary
Avoid warning about incompatible rules except if their configuration
directly conflicts with the formatter. This should reduce the noise and
potentially the need for https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/issues/8175
and https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/issues/8185
I also extended the rule and option documentation to mention any
potential formatter incompatibilities or whether they're redundant when
using the formatter.
* `LineTooLong`: This is a use case we explicitly want to support. Don't
warn about it
* `TabIndentation`, `IndentWithSpaces`: Only warn if
`indent-style="tab"`
* `IndentationWithInvalidMultiple`,
`IndentationWithInvalidMultipleComment`: Only warn if `indent-width !=
4`
* `OverIndented`: Don't warn, but mention that the rule is redundant
* `BadQuotesInlineString`: Warn if quote setting is different from
`format.quote-style`
* `BadQuotesMultilineString`, `BadQuotesDocstring`: Warn if `quote !=
"double"`
## Test Plan
I added a new integration test for the default configuration with `ALL`.
`ruff format` now only shows two incompatible rules, which feels more
reasonable.
## Summary
This PR renames the `tab-size` configuration option to `indent-width` to
express that the formatter uses the option to determine the indentation
width AND as tab width.
I first preferred naming the option `tab-width` but then decided to go
with `indent-width` because:
* It aligns with the `indent-style` option
* It would allow us to write a lint rule that asserts that each
indentation uses `indent-width` spaces.
Closes#7643
## Test Plan
Added integration test
## Summary
This PR introduces a new `pycodestyl.max-line-length` option that allows overriding the global `line-length` option for `E501` only.
This is useful when using the formatter and `E501` together, where the formatter uses a lower limit and `E501` is only used to catch extra-long lines.
Closes#7644
## Considerations
~~Our fix infrastructure asserts in some places that the fix doesn't exceed the configured `line-width`. With this change, the question is whether it should use the `pycodestyle.max-line-width` or `line-width` option to make that decision.
I opted for the global `line-width` for now, considering that it should be the lower limit. However, this constraint isn't enforced and users not using the formatter may only specify `pycodestyle.max-line-width` because they're unaware of the global option (and it solves their need).~~
~~I'm interested to hear your thoughts on whether we should use `pycodestyle.max-line-width` or `line-width` to decide on whether to emit a fix or not.~~
Edit: The linter users `pycodestyle.max-line-width`. The `line-width` option has been removed from the `LinterSettings`
## Test Plan
Added integration test. Built the documentation and verified that the links are correct.
