You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
The number and diversity of checks and automatic fixes for common problems available via ruff is ever-expanding. It is also several orders of magnitude faster than running isort, black, flake8, etc.
flake8 is only used for flake8-rst-docstrings as the entirety of that functionality has not (yet) been reproduced in ruff. Once that changes, we could remove the .flake8 file and all of flake8 as well.
Reasons we should keep things as is?
There are small deviations from the "real" black and isort checkers, as they are under constant development and their standards tend to change from time to time.
Generic Issue
Description
The number and diversity of checks and automatic fixes for common problems available via
ruff
is ever-expanding. It is also several orders of magnitude faster than runningisort
,black
,flake8
, etc.Currently, we could replace the following checks:
pyupgrade
→ruff.format
nbqa-pyupgrade
→nbqa-ruff
isort
→ruff.lint.isort
nbqa-isort
→nbqa-ruff
black
→ruff.format.*
nbqa-black
→nbqa-ruff
blackdoc
→ruff.format.docstring-code-format = true
flake8
is only used forflake8-rst-docstrings
as the entirety of that functionality has not (yet) been reproduced inruff
. Once that changes, we could remove the.flake8
file and all offlake8
as well.Reasons we should keep things as is?
There are small deviations from the "real"
black
andisort
checkers, as they are under constant development and their standards tend to change from time to time.Anthony Sottile (
pre-commit
, PyCQA) has some thoughts: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XzW4-KEB664Code of Conduct
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: