Use ruff Python formatter #150
Conversation
❌ Deploy Preview for scrc-coding-guidelines failed.
|
|
Hi @x0rw -- is this still a draft or ready for review? I saw a couple of unticked boxes |
PLeVasseur
moved this to In Progress
in [Safety Critical Rust Consortium Coding Guidelines] Work Items
x0rw
force-pushed
the
python-feature/ruff
branch
from
80d2e4c to
e3ea946
Compare
|
Hi @PLeVasseur, let me know what you think. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Hey @x0rw -- thanks for the updates! I left a couple of comments if you could take a look
pyproject.toml
Outdated
| @@ -19,3 +19,35 @@ members = ["builder"] | |||
|
|
|||
| [tool.uv.sources] | |||
| builder = { workspace = true } | |||
|
|
|||
| [tool.ruff] | |||
| # line-length = 88 | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Should we remove some of the commented out code such as this line?
Or are you considering adding them back in and wanted to check with folks?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Well it can be removed, we can't enfore line length because we have templates with long one-line strings.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
We could make exceptions for those and enforce it elsewhere?
pyproject.toml
Outdated
| "ruff>=0.12.3", | ||
| ] | ||
|
|
||
| # [tool.ruff.mccabe] |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'm curious on if this is common and/or recommended as a metric for Python code when using ruff.
Did you have some thoughts?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
max-complexity field under this ruff.mccabe, can be used to fine-tune the strictness of the cyclomatic complexity checks.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
But i think we don't need to go that far.
Resolves #146