Clear ruff Configuration
#7713
Closed
Clear ruff Configuration
#7713
Conversation
This file contains hidden or 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
tolgacangoz
changed the title
ruff Configurationruff Configuration
|
can you take a look here? @sayakpaul |
|
Thanks for your proposal, but we don't want to make code styling ultra-sophisticated, to be honest. So, the simplest reasonable alternative works. Our efforts are better spent in improving the library design and then maintaining the things that come with it, TBH. |
|
OK, understood 👍. I am withdrawing the upgrade part. What about the update part, this PR? |
tolgacangoz
changed the title
ruff Configurationruff Configuration
|
I think this was a useless PR 🥲; thus, closing. |
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Update
Cin the select list includes only complex-structure (C901), so it is not meaningful to selectCand ignore complex-structure (C901) at the same time, thus removing both.make style && make qualityshows nothing, also IMHO they can be useful, so they can be removed.__init__.pyfiles' ignore list, no error except one which I proposed to resolve at my previous PR; so removed them.src/diffusers/utils/dummy_*.pyfiles don't need to ignore unused-import (F401), so removed that line.[tool.ruff.format]section includes generic default values, so removed.Upgrade1. IMHO, ambiguous-variable-name (E741) might be very useful in terms of readability, why ignoring?2. Setting
line-length = 119and ignoring line-too-long (E501) applies on all codes but length of imports. I mean that ignoring line-too-long (E501) doesn't apply to the length of imports, soline-length = 119holds for imports. When I removeline-length = 119, because I thought it was unnecessary due to ignoring line-too-long (E501); then unsorted-imports (I001) applies for "larger" imports because the default is 88. It seems that this is still being discussed. What to do here?3. Why don't we benefit from all the power of
ruffwith its latest version? It was pinned tov0.1.5, andv0.4.2has just been announced! IMHO, there are many more fun and beneficial rules.@sayakpaul @yiyixuxu @DN6