Add Ruff Formatter to parlparse #184
Merged
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
Remaining actually bad errors, mostly missing a package or variable in an error that rarely happens?
ajparsons
force-pushed
the
formatter
branch
from
0400af3 to
d4d3154
Compare
|
This doesn't cause any issues with the current https://github.com/mysociety/parlparse/pull/176/files PR |
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Before we start having lots of PRs on actual content, I want to get a consistent formatter in.
This PR changes requirements.txt for poetry. As far as I'm aware the requirements.txt is only for dev reference - but having poetry would in principle mean it could diverge from the twfy requirement in future (the update script running in its own virtual environment).
Ruff is used to handle black, flake and isort (config matches the config used in LIH and in TWFY PR).
There's a specific problem here that this is an an old repo and we want to be able to check new scripts for good practice, while not fixing 60 errors on scripts that aren't used anymore.
To deal with this,
script/linthas a bunch of extra rules ignored to handle the outstanding issues - while the ruff vscode extention andruff check . --fixwill detect the wider range of rule breaking.I have additionally fixed a handful of scripts where the errors were real enough to not want to turn off that rule. This was all in error handling that would break if an error was found rather than the core stuff.
With this merged, I'd revisit the london-assembly PR to fit into this.