Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Ruff v0.16.0 – Significant new updates – 413 default rules up from 59

astral.sh

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 247 posts

Re: Ruff v0.16.0 – Significant new updates – 413 default rules up from 59

#101

Post by CuriouslyC »

maratc wrote: post #99
CuriouslyC wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So your argument is that your freedom to use whatever string delimiter you want (remember that ''', """, ` and even weird unicode glyphs are valid in many languages) is worth forcing other engineers on the team to know all valid string delimiters and remember to use the right regex to account for all possible weirdo choices?

My argument is that searching for \bfoo\b will produce all the results you want. Python was designed from the start so that 'foo' and "foo" are equal. It also worked like that for 30 years or so. This has not been an issue in these 30 years. But then someone came with an opinion that one of them is better than the other.

\bfoo\b will produce noisy results. People have been pushing linting rules that force a single consistent choice of string delimiters since at least 2010 when Python went from a cute academic language to a real industry workhorse.

Re: Ruff v0.16.0 – Significant new updates – 413 default rules up from 59

#102

Post by Hamuko »

alentred wrote: post #21
gempir wrote: post #10

I wish Go had something like Ruff! A lot of languages are getting amazing tool but Go has a very fragmented ecosystem with a lot of tools but none of them feel as high quality has the likes of Ruff, Oxc, Biome or even PHP's Mago

Oh wow, not so long ago the sentiment was exactly opposite. Python community was struggling with tools and everyone wished to have `gofmt` for Python. Granted, this is a linter, not a formatter, but my larger point is I am glad that Python ecosystem evolved like it did recently.

It's not really even that recent of a change. Black's been stable for the past 4+ years.

Re: Ruff v0.16.0 – Significant new updates – 413 default rules up from 59

#103

Post by phoghed »

refactor_master wrote: post #100
maratc wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My argument is more to the tune of "everybody’s code looking slightly different is not a problem in practice as long as I can read and understand it." However since you've asked so nicely here you go: everybody’s code looking different is because all humans are different. It's what makes us human. I am very serious about my craftsmanship, and I bring my "humanity" to it: sometimes I include a cultural reference (as i…

But your choice of funny variable names is not a craft, and you’re not a craftsman if you think it matters. What matters is extensibility, maintainability and value delivered. I care how the food tastes, not that the chef has a really cool Japanese knife and is really fast at cutting onions.

I need a kitchen linter to highlight dishes red that my kids leave around rather than putting in the sink or dishwasher

Re: Ruff v0.16.0 – Significant new updates – 413 default rules up from 59

#104

Post by maratc »

refactor_master wrote: post #100
maratc wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My argument is more to the tune of "everybody’s code looking slightly different is not a problem in practice as long as I can read and understand it." However since you've asked so nicely here you go: everybody’s code looking different is because all humans are different. It's what makes us human. I am very serious about my craftsmanship, and I bring my "humanity" to it: sometimes I include a cultural reference (as i…

But your choice of funny variable names is not a craft, and you’re not a craftsman if you think it matters. What matters is extensibility, maintainability and value delivered. I care how the food tastes, not that the chef has a really cool Japanese knife and is really fast at cutting onions.

I think you miss the point, but using your foodie reference: would you rather go to a couple of Michelin restaurants -- where each piece brings a reflection of the chef, the geographic area, and what quality ingredients were available on that day -- or would you rather only eat at McDonald's for an experience that is extremely consistent across days, seasons, and continents?

Now imagine a chef who has a nice little restaurant but is now being sent a couple of "quality assurance" guys from McDonald's who tell him that his choice of potato variety for chips does not exactly conform to the "standards" defined at the mothership.

Re: Ruff v0.16.0 – Significant new updates – 413 default rules up from 59

#106

Post by maratc »

CuriouslyC wrote: post #101
maratc wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My argument is that searching for \bfoo\b will produce all the results you want. Python was designed from the start so that 'foo' and "foo" are equal. It also worked like that for 30 years or so. This has not been an issue in these 30 years. But then someone came with an opinion that one of them is better than the other.

\bfoo\b will produce noisy results. People have been pushing linting rules that force a single consistent choice of string delimiters since at least 2010 when Python went from a cute academic language to a real industry workhorse.

> \bfoo\b will produce noisy results.

Add a look-behind for '[' and a look-ahead for ']' and you'll be fine.

Re: Ruff v0.16.0 – Significant new updates – 413 default rules up from 59

#107

Post by 9dev »

insanitybit wrote: post #84
9dev wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can - in fact, I have to, a lot more than I'd like - when someone makes changes with different code style settings in their IDE or tooling, and that affects unrelated parts of the code, and suddenly the PR contains tons of code that just looks subtly different but still does the same thing. If sieving the spam from ham in code reviews is your thing, go have fun. I personally prefer code that is automatically and un…

That seems like a problem caused by an autoformatted, not solved by one. Obviously having reviewable commits is a reasonable expectation but that doesn't seem like a justification at all.

Pretty much all tools developers use to write code format code to some extent while editing, but often with individual configuration knobs or default settings that are different between all ICs.

Having a single tool that runs before committing, ideally as a git hook, ensures a single, uniform style across all files touched.

Re: Ruff v0.16.0 – Significant new updates – 413 default rules up from 59

#109

Post by turtlebits »

maratc wrote: post #104
refactor_master wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But your choice of funny variable names is not a craft, and you’re not a craftsman if you think it matters. What matters is extensibility, maintainability and value delivered. I care how the food tastes, not that the chef has a really cool Japanese knife and is really fast at cutting onions.

I think you miss the point, but using your foodie reference: would you rather go to a couple of Michelin restaurants -- where each piece brings a reflection of the chef, the geographic area, and what quality ingredients were available on that day -- or would you rather only eat at McDonald's for an experience that is extremely consistent across days, seasons, and continents? Now imagine a chef who has a nice little r…

The one day, your chef leaves, the food goes to shit and productivity/output/morale drops. When the new chef arrives, then everyone has to relearn everything.

Software shouldn't be bespoke and "artisan".

Post reply on HN