-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1.1k
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
[pydoclint
] Implement docstring-missing-exception
and docstring-extraneous-exception
(DOC501
, DOC502
)
#11471
Conversation
CodSpeed Performance ReportMerging #11471 will degrade performances by 97.48%Comparing Summary
Benchmarks breakdown
|
|
code | total | + violation | - violation | + fix | - fix |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
DAR401 | 2237 | 2237 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
DAR402 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Formatter (stable)
✅ ecosystem check detected no format changes.
Formatter (preview)
✅ ecosystem check detected no format changes.
If this PR is accepted, will this preclude |
I'm not opposed to using pydocstyle instead, but I'll wait until I get a review from the ruff team to change anything. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Nice, this looks great. I'll make a few tweaks and merge today.
@charliermarsh where do you stand on darglint vs pydoclint as mentioned above |
Honestly, finding it hard to have a strong opinion on it... What do you think? Absent other opinions, let's run with |
Sounds reasonable to me |
darglint
] Implement docstring-missing-exception
and docstring-extraneous-exception
(DAR401
, DAR402
)pydoclint
] Implement docstring-missing-exception
and docstring-extraneous-exception
(DOC501
, DOC502
)
crates/ruff_linter/src/rules/pydoclint/rules/check_docstring.rs
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
crates/ruff_linter/src/rules/pydoclint/rules/check_docstring.rs
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
crates/ruff_linter/src/rules/pydoclint/rules/check_docstring.rs
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
crates/ruff_linter/src/rules/pydoclint/rules/check_docstring.rs
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
crates/ruff_linter/src/rules/pydoclint/rules/check_docstring.rs
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
Co-authored-by: T-256 <132141463+T-256@users.noreply.github.com>
impl<'a> DocstringEntries<'a> { | ||
/// Return the raised exceptions for the docstring, or `None` if the docstring does not contain | ||
/// a `Raises` section. | ||
fn from_sections(sections: &'a SectionContexts, style: SectionStyle) -> Option<Self> { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I changed this to return None
when there's no section, so we didn't have to unwrap
the raised_exceptions_range
. Feel free to revert in future PRs if that gets in the way, though I think something like that is useful to get rid of the unwrap.
Do we need to update title and description of #458 to keep tracking future implementations for this plugin? |
I'm thinking to open a new issue to track |
Summary
These are the first rules implemented as part of #458, but I plan to implement more.
Specifically, this implements
docstring-missing-exception
which checks for raised exceptions not documented in the docstring, anddocstring-extraneous-exception
which checks for exceptions in the docstring not present in the body.Test Plan
Test fixtures added for both google and numpy style.