Group function definition parameters with return type annotations #6410
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
charliermarsh
force-pushed
the
charlie/function-signature-ii
branch
from
fbff995
to
4f7d0fd
Compare
charliermarsh
commented
Aug 8, 2023
charliermarsh
commented
Aug 8, 2023
|
As I said in the summary, I'd like feedback on |
charliermarsh
force-pushed
the
charlie/function-signature-ii
branch
from
4f7d0fd
to
311c695
Compare
charliermarsh
changed the base branch from
charlie/empty-parenthesized
to
charlie/dangling
charliermarsh
force-pushed
the
charlie/function-signature-ii
branch
from
311c695
to
7452536
Compare
|
(I think this also breaks the behavior whereby we insert a trailing comma if the parameters group breaks, but I believe I can fix that.) |
charliermarsh
force-pushed
the
charlie/dangling
branch
from
6fcd9af
to
8e4f85e
Compare
PR Check ResultsBenchmarkLinuxWindows |
charliermarsh
force-pushed
the
charlie/dangling
branch
6 times, most recently
from
03eb93f
to
862e7ad
Compare
MichaReiser
reviewed
Aug 8, 2023
crates/ruff_python_formatter/src/statement/stmt_function_def.rs
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
konstin
approved these changes
Aug 8, 2023
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Looking at the black test cases, i think the following is another one of those where black doesn't add parentheses if it doesn't help with fitting:
black:
def foo(
a: int,
b: int,
c: int,
) -> intsdfsafafafdfdsasdfsfsdfasdfafdsafdfdsfasdskdsdsfdsafdsafsdfdasfffsfdsfdsafafhdskfhdsfjdslkfdlfsdkjhsdfjkdshfkljds:
return 2
ours:
def foo(
a: int,
b: int,
c: int,
) -> (
intsdfsafafafdfdsasdfsfsdfasdfafdsafdfdsfasdskdsdsfdsafdsafsdfdasfffsfdsfdsafafhdskfhdsfjdslkfdlfsdkjhsdfjkdshfkljds
):
return 2Otherwise black_compatibility@simple_cases__return_annotation_brackets.py.snap looks good
charliermarsh
force-pushed
the
charlie/dangling
branch
4 times, most recently
from
2161c23
to
8cc0a1d
Compare
charliermarsh
force-pushed
the
charlie/function-signature-ii
branch
from
7452536
to
a4f7190
Compare
|
Okay, this got way simpler thanks for the feedback. |
charliermarsh
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 8, 2023
…6413) ## Summary Given: ```python def double(a: int) -> ( # Hello int ): return 2*a ``` We currently treat `# Hello` as a trailing comment on the parameters (`(a: int)`). This PR adds a placement method to instead treat it as a dangling comment on the function definition itself, so that it gets formatted at the end of the definition, like: ```python def double(a: int) -> int: # Hello return 2*a ``` The formatting in this case is unchanged, but it's incorrect IMO for that to be a trailing comment on the parameters, and that placement leads to an instability after changing the grouping in #6410. Fixing this led to a _different_ instability related to tuple return type annotations, like: ```python def zrevrangebylex(self, name: _Key, max: _Value, min: _Value, start: int | None = None, num: int | None = None) -> ( # type: ignore[override] ): ... ``` (This is a real example.) To fix, I had to special-case tuples in that spot, though I'm not certain that's correct.
charliermarsh
force-pushed
the
charlie/function-signature-ii
branch
from
a4f7190
to
f248478
Compare
MichaReiser
approved these changes
Aug 9, 2023
|
Current dependencies on/for this PR:
This comment was auto-generated by Graphite. |
Co-authored-by: Micha Reiser <micha@reiser.io>
durumu
pushed a commit
to durumu/ruff
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 12, 2023
…stral-sh#6413) ## Summary Given: ```python def double(a: int) -> ( # Hello int ): return 2*a ``` We currently treat `# Hello` as a trailing comment on the parameters (`(a: int)`). This PR adds a placement method to instead treat it as a dangling comment on the function definition itself, so that it gets formatted at the end of the definition, like: ```python def double(a: int) -> int: # Hello return 2*a ``` The formatting in this case is unchanged, but it's incorrect IMO for that to be a trailing comment on the parameters, and that placement leads to an instability after changing the grouping in astral-sh#6410. Fixing this led to a _different_ instability related to tuple return type annotations, like: ```python def zrevrangebylex(self, name: _Key, max: _Value, min: _Value, start: int | None = None, num: int | None = None) -> ( # type: ignore[override] ): ... ``` (This is a real example.) To fix, I had to special-case tuples in that spot, though I'm not certain that's correct.
durumu
pushed a commit
to durumu/ruff
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 12, 2023
…tral-sh#6410) ## Summary This PR removes the group around function definition parameters, instead grouping the parameters with the type parameters and return type annotation. This increases Zulip's similarity score from 0.99385 to 0.99699, so it's a meaningful improvement. However, there's at least one stability error that I'm working on, and I'm really just looking for high-level feedback at this point, because I'm not happy with the solution. Closes astral-sh#6352. ## Test Plan Before: - `zulip`: 0.99396 - `django`: 0.99784 - `warehouse`: 0.99578 - `build`: 0.75436 - `transformers`: 0.99407 - `cpython`: 0.75987 - `typeshed`: 0.74432 After: - `zulip`: 0.99702 - `django`: 0.99784 - `warehouse`: 0.99585 - `build`: 0.75623 - `transformers`: 0.99470 - `cpython`: 0.75988 - `typeshed`: 0.74853
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.
Summary
This PR removes the group around function definition parameters, instead grouping the parameters with the type parameters and return type annotation.
This increases Zulip's similarity score from 0.99385 to 0.99699, so it's a meaningful improvement. However, there's at least one stability error that I'm working on, and I'm really just looking for high-level feedback at this point, because I'm not happy with the solution.
Closes #6352.
Test Plan
Before:
zulip: 0.99396django: 0.99784warehouse: 0.99578build: 0.75436transformers: 0.99407cpython: 0.75987typeshed: 0.74432After:
zulip: 0.99702django: 0.99784warehouse: 0.99585build: 0.75623transformers: 0.99470cpython: 0.75988typeshed: 0.74853