PLR1702 spam #15570
Comments
|
PLR1702 is currently marking every line inside this function: def foo():
while a: # should not be marked - not a violation
if b: # should not be marked - not a violation
for c in range(3): # should not be marked - not a violation
if d: # should not be marked - not a violation
while e: # should not be marked - not a violation
if f: # should not be marked - not a violation
for g in z: # not bad to mark this line, but not needed if only marking the max
print(p) # this line should be marked
pass # this line doesn't need to be marked, because the previous line is marked
else: # should not be marked - not a violation
print(q) # should not be marked - not a violation |
dylwil3
added
diagnostics
|
That sounds annoying, I'm sorry! When I run this locally or in the playground, I only see a single diagnostic, though the whole range is highlighted. Similarly, when I use the VSCode extension, I see the entire block highlighted but the pop-up only displays a single diagnostic no matter where I hover. Could you help me reproduce what you're seeing? What's your setup - how are you calling Ruff, and what version are you using? VSCode: 
Terminal: ❯ cat tmp.py
def foo():
while a: # should not be marked - not a violation
if b: # should not be marked - not a violation
for c in range(3): # should not be marked - not a violation
if d: # should not be marked - not a violation
while e: # should not be marked - not a violation
if f: # should not be marked - not a violation
for g in z: # not bad to mark this line, but not needed if only marking the max
print(p) # this line should be marked
pass # this line doesn't need to be marked, because the previous line is marked
else: # should not be marked - not a violation
print(q) # should not be marked - not a violation
❯ uvx ruff check tmp.py --isolated --select PLR --preview --no-cache
tmp.py:2:5: PLR1702 Too many nested blocks (7 > 5)
|
1 | def foo():
2 | / while a: # should not be marked - not a violation
3 | | if b: # should not be marked - not a violation
4 | | for c in range(3): # should not be marked - not a violation
5 | | if d: # should not be marked - not a violation
6 | | while e: # should not be marked - not a violation
7 | | if f: # should not be marked - not a violation
8 | | for g in z: # not bad to mark this line, but not needed if only marking the max
9 | | print(p) # this line should be marked
10 | | pass # this line doesn't need to be marked, because the previous line is marked
11 | | else: # should not be marked - not a violation
12 | | print(q) # should not be marked - not a violation
| |____________________^ PLR1702
|
Found 1 error. |
|
Here's an example with multiple diagnostics. def foo():
while a: # should not be marked - not a violation
if b: # should not be marked - not a violation
for c in range(3): # should not be marked - not a violation
if d: # should not be marked - not a violation
while e: # should not be marked - not a violation
if f: # should not be marked - not a violation
for g in z: # not bad to mark this line, but not needed if only marking the max
print(p) # this line should be marked
pass # this line doesn't need to be marked, because the previous line is marked
else:
if h:
print(r)
else: # should not be marked - not a violation
print(q) # should not be marked - not a violation |
|
In the original example of the first screenshot, there 250 lines all completely highlighted, making it difficult to see other diagnostics. If there are 5 violations, highlighting 5 lines is enough. |
|
Thank you, that's helpful! I think there's a small design question about how to handle this situation, and we should be conscious of whether we are creating a breaking change by modifying where a suppression comment can go. But I agree that we can do better here. |
If a function has nested blocks to violate PLR1702, almost the entire function is marked for it, including lines that are not violations.
Even lines that are only nested 2 or 3 deep are marked with squigglies.
Even when there are multiple lines in a block nested 9 deep, I think it would be enough to only mark the first line of that deeply nested block.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: