ruff format #550
Open
ruff format #550
+123
−57
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
Reviewer's GuideThis PR applies automated formatting via Ruff across the Python codebase, restructuring long lines into multi-line expressions (especially logging, solver invocations, and DataFrame pipelines) and adds a Ruff format check to the CI workflow to enforce consistent styling. File-Level Changes
Tips and commandsInteracting with Sourcery
Customizing Your ExperienceAccess your dashboard to:
Getting Help
|
|
![sourcery-ai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/48477?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Hey @polyfloyd - I've reviewed your changes and they look great!
Here's what I looked at during the review
- 🟢 General issues: all looks good
- 🟢 Security: all looks good
- 🟢 Testing: all looks good
- 🟢 Complexity: all looks good
- 🟢 Documentation: all looks good
Help me be more useful! Please click 👍 or 👎 on each comment and I'll use the feedback to improve your reviews.
Comment on lines
631
to
634
| if isinstance(forecast_input, str): | ||
| if isinstance(ast.literal_eval(forecast_input), list): | ||
| forecast_input = ast.literal_eval( | ||
| forecast_input | ||
| ) | ||
| forecast_input = ast.literal_eval(forecast_input) | ||
| runtimeparams[forecast_key] = forecast_input |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
suggestion (code-quality): Merge nested if conditions (merge-nested-ifs)
Suggested change
| if isinstance(forecast_input, str): | |
| if isinstance(ast.literal_eval(forecast_input), list): | |
| forecast_input = ast.literal_eval( | |
| forecast_input | |
| ) | |
| forecast_input = ast.literal_eval(forecast_input) | |
| runtimeparams[forecast_key] = forecast_input | |
| if isinstance(forecast_input, str) and isinstance(ast.literal_eval(forecast_input), list): | |
| forecast_input = ast.literal_eval(forecast_input) | |
| runtimeparams[forecast_key] = forecast_input | |
Explanation
Too much nesting can make code difficult to understand, and this is especiallytrue in Python, where there are no brackets to help out with the delineation of
different nesting levels.
Reading deeply nested code is confusing, since you have to keep track of which
conditions relate to which levels. We therefore strive to reduce nesting where
possible, and the situation where two if conditions can be combined using
and is an easy win.
| self.logger.error("EMHASS was unable to obtain configuration data from Home Assistant") | ||
| self.logger.error( | ||
| "EMHASS was unable to obtain configuration data from Home Assistant" | ||
| ) | ||
| return False | ||
|
|
||
| def get_data( |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
issue (code-quality): We've found these issues:
- Replace manual loop counter with call to enumerate (
convert-to-enumerate) - Extract duplicate code into method (
extract-duplicate-method) - Low code quality found in RetrieveHass.get_data - 7% (
low-code-quality)
Explanation
The quality score for this function is below the quality threshold of 25%.
This score is a combination of the method length, cognitive complexity and working memory.
How can you solve this?
It might be worth refactoring this function to make it shorter and more readable.
- Reduce the function length by extracting pieces of functionality out into
their own functions. This is the most important thing you can do - ideally a
function should be less than 10 lines. - Reduce nesting, perhaps by introducing guard clauses to return early.
- Ensure that variables are tightly scoped, so that code using related concepts
sits together within the function rather than being scattered.
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.
I started out by wanting to fix that failing
ruff checkworkflow which complains about single quotes.I took it a little further and used
ruff formatand added it to the CI too. Please let me know what you think :)Summary by Sourcery
Apply ruff-based code formatting across the Python codebase and enforce formatting in the CI pipeline
Enhancements:
CI:
ruff format --check --diff