Feat apply ruff

[phi-friday]

apply ruff example
related: #496

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 89.89899% with 20 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 95.93%. Comparing base (abdd535) to head (b97646d).
Report is 2 commits behind head on master.

Files	Patch %	Lines
bayes_opt/logger.py	69.23%	8 Missing ⚠️
bayes_opt/acquisition.py	92.45%	4 Missing ⚠️
bayes_opt/target_space.py	87.87%	4 Missing ⚠️
bayes_opt/domain_reduction.py	92.00%	2 Missing ⚠️
bayes_opt/util.py	60.00%	2 Missing ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master     #497      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   94.70%   95.93%   +1.22%     
==========================================
  Files           9       10       +1     
  Lines         680      861     +181     
==========================================
+ Hits          644      826     +182     
+ Misses         36       35       -1     

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

[till-m]

Hi @phi-friday,

thanks for this PR! I think it would really improve this codebase. I would merge #498 before merging this, but I think reviews here might still take some time.
I've commented on some things that I noticed. These are not necessarily requests to change things, it assume there's generally a solid reason for you handling things the way you do that I might not have seen.

Consider this sort of a preliminary review, I would like to have a look again once you feel the PR is ready.

Finally, if there are no objections from you or any other contributors, I might ask a coworker with some more SE experience to additionally review this PR. I don't think my background here is sufficient to provide solid feedback.

[till-m]

Could you ping me when you feel this is ready for a review?

[phi-friday]

Could you ping me when you feel this is ready for a review?

@till-m
Until the new ruff version is released, there's nothing else I'd like to modify.
I'm ready.

[till-m]

Looks good to me, generally. I added some comments to clarify things.

[till-m]

@Panaetius Ralf, I would appreciate your feedback on this PR, if you have the time. No need to focus too much on the code (which should be functionally the same), the high-level things are what's important.

[till-m]

I think the codecov bot is not working correctly and coverage is not being updated?

In any case, I think this PR looks good, insofar as I am able to judge it.

I would wait a bit more to see if anyone else wants to give a review, but then I would merge this soon.

[till-m]

Thanks for your contribution!