Skip to content

Conversation

@ntBre
Copy link
Contributor

@ntBre ntBre commented Mar 12, 2025

Summary

Stabilizes RUF051. The tests and docs looked good.

Test Plan

1 closed documentation issue from 4 days after the rule was added and 1 typo fix from the same day it was added, but no other issues or PRs.

Summary
--

Stabilizes RUF051. The tests and docs looked good.

Test Plan
--

1 closed documentation issue from 4 days after the rule was added and 1 typo fix
from the same day it was added, but no other issues or PRs.
@ntBre ntBre added the rule Implementing or modifying a lint rule label Mar 12, 2025
@ntBre ntBre added this to the v0.10 milestone Mar 12, 2025
@codspeed-hq
Copy link

codspeed-hq bot commented Mar 12, 2025

CodSpeed Performance Report

Merging #16658 will degrade performances by 10.81%

Comparing brent/ruf051-0.10 (19819c7) with micha/ruff-0.10 (b8f1284)

Summary

❌ 1 regressions
✅ 31 untouched benchmarks

⚠️ Please fix the performance issues or acknowledge them on CodSpeed.

Benchmarks breakdown

Benchmark BASE HEAD Change
red_knot_check_file[incremental] 4.9 ms 5.5 ms -10.81%

@github-actions
Copy link
Contributor

ruff-ecosystem results

Linter (stable)

ℹ️ ecosystem check detected linter changes. (+18 -0 violations, +0 -0 fixes in 7 projects; 48 projects unchanged)

DisnakeDev/disnake (+3 -0 violations, +0 -0 fixes)

+ disnake/ext/commands/cog.py:177:21: RUF051 [*] Use `pop` instead of `key in dict` followed by `del dict[key]`
+ disnake/ext/commands/cog.py:179:21: RUF051 [*] Use `pop` instead of `key in dict` followed by `del dict[key]`
+ disnake/ext/commands/cog.py:181:21: RUF051 [*] Use `pop` instead of `key in dict` followed by `del dict[key]`

RasaHQ/rasa (+2 -0 violations, +0 -0 fixes)

+ rasa/core/migrate.py:134:9: RUF051 [*] Use `pop` instead of `key in dict` followed by `del dict[key]`
+ rasa/nlu/classifiers/diet_classifier.py:781:13: RUF051 [*] Use `pop` instead of `key in dict` followed by `del dict[key]`

apache/airflow (+5 -0 violations, +0 -0 fixes)

ruff check --no-cache --exit-zero --ignore RUF9 --no-fix --output-format concise --no-preview --select ALL

+ docs/build_docs.py:636:13: RUF051 [*] Use `pop` instead of `key in dict` followed by `del dict[key]`
+ docs/build_docs.py:638:13: RUF051 [*] Use `pop` instead of `key in dict` followed by `del dict[key]`
+ providers/google/src/airflow/providers/google/cloud/operators/dataproc.py:666:17: RUF051 [*] Use `pop` instead of `key in dict` followed by `del dict[key]`
+ providers/google/src/airflow/providers/google/cloud/operators/dataproc.py:680:21: RUF051 [*] Use `pop` instead of `key in dict` followed by `del dict[key]`
+ task-sdk/src/airflow/sdk/definitions/baseoperator.py:1268:13: RUF051 [*] Use `pop` instead of `key in dict` followed by `del dict[key]`

apache/superset (+1 -0 violations, +0 -0 fixes)

ruff check --no-cache --exit-zero --ignore RUF9 --no-fix --output-format concise --no-preview --select ALL

+ superset/dashboards/schemas.py:184:13: RUF051 [*] Use `pop` instead of `key in dict` followed by `del dict[key]`

reflex-dev/reflex (+1 -0 violations, +0 -0 fixes)

+ reflex/vars/base.py:1773:21: RUF051 [*] Use `pop` instead of `key in dict` followed by `del dict[key]`

zulip/zulip (+5 -0 violations, +0 -0 fixes)

ruff check --no-cache --exit-zero --ignore RUF9 --no-fix --output-format concise --no-preview --select ALL

+ corporate/tests/test_stripe.py:663:17: RUF051 [*] Use `pop` instead of `key in dict` followed by `del dict[key]`
+ zerver/lib/markdown/__init__.py:2512:9: RUF051 [*] Use `pop` instead of `key in dict` followed by `del dict[key]`
+ zerver/lib/test_runner.py:103:13: RUF051 [*] Use `pop` instead of `key in dict` followed by `del dict[key]`
+ zerver/tornado/event_queue.py:551:13: RUF051 [*] Use `pop` instead of `key in dict` followed by `del dict[key]`
+ zerver/tornado/handlers.py:42:9: RUF051 [*] Use `pop` instead of `key in dict` followed by `del dict[key]`

astropy/astropy (+1 -0 violations, +0 -0 fixes)

+ astropy/modeling/core.py:189:17: RUF051 [*] Use `pop` instead of `key in dict` followed by `del dict[key]`

Changes by rule (1 rules affected)

code total + violation - violation + fix - fix
RUF051 18 18 0 0 0

Linter (preview)

✅ ecosystem check detected no linter changes.

@ntBre
Copy link
Contributor Author

ntBre commented Mar 12, 2025

These all look like true positives.

@ntBre ntBre mentioned this pull request Mar 12, 2025
2 tasks
@ntBre ntBre merged commit e9bfdfd into micha/ruff-0.10 Mar 12, 2025
20 of 21 checks passed
@ntBre ntBre deleted the brent/ruf051-0.10 branch March 12, 2025 12:37
MichaReiser pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Mar 13, 2025
Summary
--

Stabilizes RUF051. The tests and docs looked good.

Test Plan
--

1 closed documentation issue from 4 days after the rule was added and 1
typo fix from the same day it was added, but no other issues or PRs.
MichaReiser pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Mar 13, 2025
Summary
--

Stabilizes RUF051. The tests and docs looked good.

Test Plan
--

1 closed documentation issue from 4 days after the rule was added and 1
typo fix from the same day it was added, but no other issues or PRs.
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

rule Implementing or modifying a lint rule

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants