Fix zulip unstable formatting with end-of-line comments #6386
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
|
Current dependencies on/for this PR: This comment was auto-generated by Graphite. |
PR Check ResultsBenchmarkLinuxWindows |
MichaReiser
reviewed
Aug 7, 2023
Comment on lines
+256
to
+265
| // Avoid unstable formatting with | ||
| // ```python | ||
| // x = () - (# | ||
| // ) | ||
| // ``` | ||
| // Without this the comment would go after the empty tuple first, but still expand | ||
| // the bin op. In the second formatting pass they are trailing bin op comments | ||
| // so the bin op collapse. Suboptimally we keep parentheses around the bin op in | ||
| // either case. | ||
| (!self.comments[..end_of_line_split].is_empty()).then_some(hard_line_break()), |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
What's our motivation to keep the trailing end of line comments on the same line as the opening parentheses?
I prefer
x = () - (
# comment
)over
x = () - ( # comment
)There was a problem hiding this comment.
Turning an end-of-line comment into an own line comment leads to unstable formatting by the two spaces we insert after the line, so we need turn one comment kind into the other atm.
From a style perspective i prefer black with () # comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Turning an end-of-line comment into an own line comment leads to unstable formatting by the two spaces we insert after the line,
We shouldn't insert the two empty spaces in that case. We just format them as own line comments.
This isn't possible without moving the comment inside of a = call([ # empty because of x
], b) + []I prefer: a = call(
[
# empty because of x
],
b
) + []Over a = call([], b) + [] # empty because of xBecause it is now unclear what the comment refers to |
|
I haven’t reviewed yet but just want to confirm - is this still necessary after my two PRs that get the stability checks passing? |
|
I think so, this is a slightly different case (empty tuple vs. empty function) that the minimizer stumbled into because you can get to it by removing the function. I'll rebase and check again once the other PRs are merged |
MichaReiser
approved these changes
Aug 7, 2023
|
Okay, should be all-clear to rebase. |
MichaReiser
reviewed
Aug 8, 2023
crates/ruff_python_formatter/tests/snapshots/format@statement__delete.py.snap
Show resolved
Hide resolved
## Bug
Given
```python
x = () - (#
)
```
the comment is a dangling comment of the empty tuple. This is an end-of-line comment so it may move after the expression. It still expands the parent, so the operator breaks:
```python
x = (
()
- () #
)
```
In the next formatting pass, the comment is not a trailing tuple but a trailing bin op comment, so the bin op doesn't break anymore. The comment again expands the parent, so we still add the superfluous parentheses
```python
x = (
() - () #
)
```
## Fix
The new formatting is to keep the comment on the empty tuple. This is a log uglier and again has additional outer parentheses, but it's stable:
```python
x = (
()
- ( #
)
)
```
## Alternatives
Black formats all the examples above as
```python
x = () - () #
```
which i find better.
I would be happy about any suggestions for better solutions than the current one. I'd mainly need a workaround for expand parent having an effect on the bin op instead of first moving the comment to the end and then applying expand parent to the assign statement.
konstin
force-pushed
the
fix_zulip_unstable_formatting
branch
from
d5547e9
to
58a33f4
Compare
konstin
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 10, 2023
**Summary** I collected all examples of end-of-line comments after opening parentheses that i could think of so we get a comprehensive view at the state of their formatting (#6390). This PR intentionally only adds tests cases without any changes in formatting. We need to decide which exact formatting we want, ideally in terms of these test files, and implement this in follow-up PRs. ~~One stability check is still deactivated pending #6386
durumu
pushed a commit
to durumu/ruff
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 12, 2023
## Bug
Given
```python
x = () - (#
)
```
the comment is a dangling comment of the empty tuple. This is an
end-of-line comment so it may move after the expression. It still
expands the parent, so the operator breaks:
```python
x = (
()
- () #
)
```
In the next formatting pass, the comment is not a trailing tuple but a
trailing bin op comment, so the bin op doesn't break anymore. The
comment again expands the parent, so we still add the superfluous
parentheses
```python
x = (
() - () #
)
```
## Fix
The new formatting is to keep the comment on the empty tuple. This is a
log uglier and again has additional outer parentheses, but it's stable:
```python
x = (
()
- ( #
)
)
```
## Alternatives
Black formats all the examples above as
```python
x = () - () #
```
which i find better.
I would be happy about any suggestions for better solutions than the
current one. I'd mainly need a workaround for expand parent having an
effect on the bin op instead of first moving the comment to the end and
then applying expand parent to the assign statement.
durumu
pushed a commit
to durumu/ruff
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 12, 2023
…ral-sh#6420) **Summary** I collected all examples of end-of-line comments after opening parentheses that i could think of so we get a comprehensive view at the state of their formatting (astral-sh#6390). This PR intentionally only adds tests cases without any changes in formatting. We need to decide which exact formatting we want, ideally in terms of these test files, and implement this in follow-up PRs. ~~One stability check is still deactivated pending astral-sh#6386
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Bug
Given
the comment is a dangling comment of the empty tuple. This is an end-of-line comment so it may move after the expression. It still expands the parent, so the operator breaks:
In the next formatting pass, the comment is not a trailing tuple but a trailing bin op comment, so the bin op doesn't break anymore. The comment again expands the parent, so we still add the superfluous parentheses
Fix
The new formatting is to keep the comment on the empty tuple. This is a log uglier and again has additional outer parentheses, but it's stable:
Alternatives
Black formats all the examples above as
which i find better.
I would be happy about any suggestions for better solutions than the current one. I'd mainly need a workaround for expand parent having an effect on the bin op instead of first moving the comment to the end and then applying expand parent to the assign statement.