Inconsistent line formatting when using ruff

[bavo96]

When using ruff formatter, I get an annoying behaviour like this:

First time format the code:

-        support_care_config[profile]["AIConfig"][
-            "additional_fallback"
-        ] = additional_fallback
+        support_care_config[profile]["AIConfig"]["additional_fallback"] = (
+            additional_fallback
+        )

Change some code below this block and code, and then format the code again:

-        support_care_config[profile]["AIConfig"]["additional_fallback"] = (
-            additional_fallback
-        )
+        support_care_config[profile]["AIConfig"][
+            "additional_fallback"
+        ] = additional_fallback

What might be the issue of this behavior? Really need some help here :(

My ruff is at version 0.5.3 and I don't have any ruff.toml file, using the default settings of ruff.

[MichaReiser]

Hmm, I'm unable to reproduce this in the playground

Can you tell me more about how you run ruff? Do you use Ruff in the editor or in the CLI? Do you have a more complete example that you could share?

[MichaReiser]

Hmm, I'm not very familiar with neovim. Maybe @dhruvmanila spots something? I suspect that you might be using two different formatters.

[bavo96]

Currently I have these lsp servers running:

Do you think maybe the pylsp is overlapping with ruff?

Currently I only have this config to handle between ruff and pylsp:

function M.on_attach(server, buff)
    -- Disable hover in favor of python lsp server
    if server.name == 'ruff' then
        server.server_capabilities.hoverProvider = false
    end

[MichaReiser]

Did you install any of the plugins listed here?

[dhruvmanila]

Do you think maybe the pylsp is overlapping with ruff?

This could happen. The snippet that you've provided would send the formatting request to all the server that supports formatting. What you want instead is to only send it to a specific server which can be done by:

-- Auto formatting when saving file
vim.api.nvim_create_autocmd("BufWritePre", {
    buffer = buff,
    callback = function()
        vim.lsp.buf.format { 
			async = false,
			filter = function(client)
				return client.name == "ruff"
			end
		}
    end
})

[bavo96]

This is what I'm currently installing using pip install -r requirements.txt:

ruff==0.5.3
python-lsp-server==1.11.0
isort==5.13.2

[bavo96]

Do you think maybe the pylsp is overlapping with ruff?

This could happen. The snippet that you've provided would send the formatting request to all the server that supports formatting. What you want instead is to only send it to a specific server which can be done by:

-- Auto formatting when saving file
vim.api.nvim_create_autocmd("BufWritePre", {
    buffer = buff,
    callback = function()
        vim.lsp.buf.format { 
      async = false,
      filter = function(client)
        return client.name == "ruff"
      end
    }
    end
})

I have turned off all linters and formatters from pylsp like this, but somehow the pylsp formatters and linters are still running:

    elseif server == 'pylsp' then -- ===> Completions, Definitions, Hover, References, Signature Help, and Symbols in Python
        return {
            pylsp = {
                plugins = {
                    -- Turn these off to use flake8, see: https://github.com/python-lsp/python-lsp-server
                    pycodestyle = {
                        enabled = false,
                    },
                    mccabe = { enabled = false },
                    pyflakes = { enabled = false },

                    -- Turn these off to use black, see: https://github.com/python-lsp/python-lsp-black
                    autopep8 = { enabled = false },
                    yapf = { enabled = false },

                    -- Currenlty turn off to use ruff
                    -- Linter
                    flake8 = { enabled = false },
                },
                configurationSources = {},
            }
        }

But after following your code, the formatting process is super fast now (maybe only using ruff), and the code doesn't change anymore :D I'll test more to see whether this issue has gone or not, and get back to confirm later :D. Thank you guys for your super fast library and super fast replies also ❤️

[bavo96]

After testing for a few days, the issue has gone <3 Many thanks for your fantastic solution @MichaReiser @dhruvmanila