-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 590
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
build: format code with ruff format
over black
#7447
Conversation
ruff format
ruff format
over black
2809c6d
to
2ddeadc
Compare
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
LGTM!
2d600b0
to
63152f4
Compare
909ebe3
to
3fa18b6
Compare
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
LGTM! We can leave the black
optional dependency now for the decompiler
feature and potentially move that over to ruff format
later. Alternatively, we can leave people to their own formatters and not format the code at all.
82629af
to
bc4efd4
Compare
Great! Went ahead and rebased on top of latest. |
bc4efd4
to
3a73afb
Compare
11e8969
to
438ad43
Compare
Thank you! |
Ruff's Python formatter was announced a couple days ago, so why not? We already use Ruff for linting.
I've commented on the changes Ruff made, but they almost all seem positive (except for the lambda formatting, which is a known issue and already has somebody working on it).
Technically, caught a minor CI issue where the "decompiler" extra wasn't getting installed for tests of that functionality. It worked previously because Black was already a dev dependency.
(I intentionally haven't tried replacing the decompiler functionality with
ruff format
. Not sure if I should? Wanted to check first, since I've never even used the decompile functionality myself.)