Skip to content

Conversation

danceratopz
Copy link
Member

@danceratopz danceratopz commented Sep 26, 2025

🗒️ Description

This updates EEST's ruff rules to match those in execution-specs as closely as possible. Only 3&1/2 remaining ARG00* checks need to be enabled (and line-length 79) for parity. Issues linked below.

🔗 Related Issues or PRs

They were mainly thrashed out during this PR:

which was summarized here:

Remaining tasks to obtain parity:

✅ Checklist

  • All: Ran fast tox checks to avoid unnecessary CI fails, see also Code Standards and Enabling Pre-commit Checks:
    uvx --with=tox-uv tox -e lint,typecheck,spellcheck,markdownlint
  • All: PR title adheres to the repo standard - it will be used as the squash commit message and should start type(scope):.
  • All: Considered adding an entry to CHANGELOG.md. skipped
  • All: Considered updating the online docs in the ./docs/ directory.
  • All: Set appropriate labels for the changes (only maintainers can apply labels).

@danceratopz danceratopz added type:chore Type: Chore scope:tooling Scope: Python tools (uv, ruff, tox,...) labels Sep 26, 2025
]
ignore = [
"C401", # Unnecessary generator set
"C408", # Unnecessary collection call
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Please add C901 to ignore

Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I think since C90 is not selected, we don't need to ignore C901

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

That's correct, C901 is not selected, so no need to ignore.

Copy link
Collaborator

@gurukamath gurukamath left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Apart from the ingored ARG space rules, it looks good to me. But I assume the ARG stuff is going to be handled in a different PR.

@danceratopz
Copy link
Member Author

@gurukamath Yes, we'll PR those separately 👍

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
scope:tooling Scope: Python tools (uv, ruff, tox,...) type:chore Type: Chore
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants