tests/emulator: add license, lint with ruff #412
Conversation
This file contains 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
Gerschtli
approved these changes
Sep 11, 2024
shelvacu
approved these changes
Sep 11, 2024
| uses: cachix/install-nix-action@v25 | ||
|
|
||
| - name: Run ruff linter | ||
| run: nix run 'nixpkgs#ruff' -- check |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
in the interest of running the version of ruff we expect to run, shouldn't this point to something in flake.nix? Unfortunately I don't think nix run .#nixpkgs.legacyPackages.x86_64.ruff works but we could expose ruff in the flake and run that.
|
hm. maybe it'd be more logical to pack it into a flake check than to expose ruff from it? I don't have experience with flake checks though.
|
|
in the end, a flake check is just a derivation that either ends with |
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Adds ruff-based linting for python files.
Related to @shelvacu's #393,
where I do appreciate the idea of linting, but I'd like to have it decoupled from script-building time.