Drop __get__ and __set__ from unnecessary-dunder-call

[zanieb]

These are for descriptors which affects the behavior of the object as a property; I do not think they should be called directly but there is no alternative when working with the object directly.

Closes #9789

[charliermarsh]

Agreed

[github-actions]

ruff-ecosystem results

Linter (stable)

ℹ️ ecosystem check encountered linter errors. (no lint changes; 1 project error)

sphinx-doc/sphinx (error)

ruff failed
  Cause: Selection of unstable rules without the `--preview` flag is not allowed. Enable preview or remove selection of:
	- FURB113
	- FURB131
	- FURB132

Linter (preview)

ℹ️ ecosystem check detected linter changes. (+0 -7 violations, +0 -0 fixes in 2 projects; 41 projects unchanged)

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

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

- airflow/serialization/serialized_objects.py:875:17: PLC2801 Unnecessary dunder call to `__get__`. Use `get` method.

bokeh/bokeh (+0 -6 violations, +0 -0 fixes)

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

- src/bokeh/core/property/descriptors.py:394:16: PLC2801 Unnecessary dunder call to `__get__`. Use `get` method.
- src/bokeh/core/property/descriptors.py:444:21: PLC2801 Unnecessary dunder call to `__get__`. Use `get` method.
- src/bokeh/core/property/descriptors.py:652:17: PLC2801 Unnecessary dunder call to `__get__`. Use `get` method.
- src/bokeh/core/property/descriptors.py:944:17: PLC2801 Unnecessary dunder call to `__set__`. Use subscript assignment.
- tests/unit/bokeh/core/property/test_descriptors.py:105:13: PLC2801 Unnecessary dunder call to `__set__`. Use subscript assignment.
- tests/unit/bokeh/core/property/test_descriptors.py:98:13: PLC2801 Unnecessary dunder call to `__get__`. Use `get` method.

Changes by rule (1 rules affected)

code	total	+ violation	- violation	+ fix	- fix
PLC2801	7	0	7	0	0

[zanieb]

Unclear if we should drop the violation entirely. I think we should though — will require a bit more work and some test coverage.

[charliermarsh]

Yeah I say we drop it.

[AlexWaygood]

The suggestion for __delete__ is similarly weird — calling .__delete__() on a descriptor instance is very different to using the del statement

[zanieb]

Ah good catch yeah that one is for descriptors too...

[zanieb]

Can't approve but lgtm, thanks!