Skip to content

Lint codebase with ruff - #2671

Merged
tbennun merged 22 commits into
mainfrom
more-ruff
Oct 9, 2026
Merged

tbennun merged 22 commits into
mainfrom
more-ruff

Conversation

@tbennun

@tbennun tbennun commented Oct 8, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

No description provided.

@tbennun
tbennun marked this pull request as ready for review October 8, 2026 20:09
@tbennun tbennun changed the title Run additional ruff checks Lint codebase with ruff Oct 8, 2026
@tbennun
tbennun requested a review from ThrudPrimrose October 8, 2026 20:40
@ThrudPrimrose

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

As discussed, these ruff changes are fine and seems alright to me (need to fix conflicts)

@tbennun
tbennun enabled auto-merge October 9, 2026 02:55
@tbennun
tbennun added this pull request to the merge queue Oct 9, 2026
Merged via the queue into main with commit 893c26f Oct 9, 2026
17 checks passed
@tbennun
tbennun deleted the more-ruff branch October 9, 2026 04:05
ThrudPrimrose added a commit that referenced this pull request Oct 9, 2026
ThrudPrimrose added a commit that referenced this pull request Oct 9, 2026
# Conflicts:
#	dace/sdfg/dealias.py
#	dace/transformation/passes/loop_local_memory_reduction.py
#	dace/transformation/passes/symbol_propagation.py
ThrudPrimrose added a commit that referenced this pull request Oct 9, 2026
# Conflicts:
#	dace/frontend/python/newast.py
#	tests/passes/split_tasklets_test.py
ThrudPrimrose added a commit that referenced this pull request Oct 9, 2026
Files extended never changed take main's version; files both changed keep extended's code, linted with main's
ruff configuration (autofixes, preview fixes for PERF401/403, hand fixes for the rest) instead of a line-level
merge, which spliced the two sides' rewrites of one statement.
ThrudPrimrose added a commit that referenced this pull request Oct 9, 2026
…ions on data descriptors and dtypes, union-aware annotation parsing), and the re-export and imports the lint split dropped
ThrudPrimrose pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Oct 9, 2026
tbennun added a commit that referenced this pull request Oct 11, 2026
Brings in the squashed ruff lint migration (#2671) and later fixes. The 18
conflicting files were resolved by normalizing base, branch, and main with
main's pinned ruff (0.15.5, `check --fix` + `format`) before a three-way merge;
the remaining overlaps (backward-pass BFS loop, nested-SDFG scope insertion,
and import blocks) were merged by hand, keeping the branch logic in main's style.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
tbennun added a commit that referenced this pull request Oct 11, 2026
Brings in the squashed ruff lint migration (#2671) and later fixes.
The three conflicting files merged cleanly after normalizing base and branch with
main's pinned ruff (0.15.5, check --fix + format).

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
tbennun added a commit that referenced this pull request Oct 11, 2026
Brings in the squashed ruff lint migration (#2671) and later fixes.
Conflicts were resolved by normalizing base and branch with main's pinned ruff
(0.15.5, check --fix + format) before a three-way merge. In the CPU codegen for
setting a reference, the branch's cast to the reference's pointer type is kept
over main's f-string rewrite of the uncast line.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
tbennun added a commit that referenced this pull request Oct 11, 2026
Brings in the squashed ruff lint migration (#2671) and later fixes.
The seven conflicting schedule-tree files are identical to dynamo-frontend's pre-merge
versions, so they take the same resolution as that branch's merge (7890b0c): base,
branch and main normalized with main's pinned ruff (0.15.5, check --fix + format),
then three-way merged, with the import blocks and nested-SDFG scope insertion
merged by hand.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants