3 ms·

Looks very cool, but I don't feel like I've had many problems with tool speed. Is this actually better than all of those listed tools in terms of features? I fe

Looks very cool, but I don't feel like I've had many problems with tool speed. Is this actually better than all of those listed tools in terms of features? I feel like I might just end up using all of them.

jxi 3y ago
Black takes a good 3-5 seconds each time to format for me. Very noticeable.
- kstrauser 3y ago
  Same. The difference between ruff and, say, pylint, is night and day. The tools it replaces are amazing in their own right. However, having ruff and a language server point out problems the moment I type them is wonderful.
- aobdev 3y ago
  Just curious, how are you using black? I would expect it to take 3-5 seconds for 10k LoC, but how frequently do you need to format that much code to notice 3-5 seconds at all?
  - stavros 3y ago
    Yeah, with pre-commit, it basically only takes <startup cost> seconds for me.
twunde 3y ago
Ruff isn't quite at feature priority with the tools it's replacing (although it's close). The main benefits to using ruff is that it's great enough to run regularly locally without being noticable, even on large codebases and it provides tool chain consolidation (although the latter can be achieved with other tools like pants). The speed difference is more noticable in monorepos. If you instead have many smaller repos it probably makes sense to just implement the original tools
acdha 3y ago
The speed difference sneaks up on you - Ruff is so fast there’s usually no perceptible delay but then you use flake8 + isort + pyupgrade and you realize how much you’d gotten used to the minor but noticeable delays. For me, the big win is having a single tool instead of a dozen - like when the last flake8 update happened we had to play plug-in Jenga until everything updated, you have different configuration files for flake8, isort, pyupgrade, pylint, bandit, etc. and inconsistent support for pyproject.toml or ignoring things, etc. None of that is a big problem but it’s nice for it just to be gone entirely.

jxi 3y ago

Black takes a good 3-5 seconds each time to format for me. Very noticeable.

kstrauser 3y ago
Same. The difference between ruff and, say, pylint, is night and day. The tools it replaces are amazing in their own right. However, having ruff and a language server point out problems the moment I type them is wonderful.
aobdev 3y ago
Just curious, how are you using black? I would expect it to take 3-5 seconds for 10k LoC, but how frequently do you need to format that much code to notice 3-5 seconds at all?
- stavros 3y ago
  Yeah, with pre-commit, it basically only takes <startup cost> seconds for me.

twunde 3y ago

Ruff isn't quite at feature priority with the tools it's replacing (although it's close). The main benefits to using ruff is that it's great enough to run regularly locally without being noticable, even on large codebases and it provides tool chain consolidation (although the latter can be achieved with other tools like pants). The speed difference is more noticable in monorepos. If you instead have many smaller repos it probably makes sense to just implement the original tools

acdha 3y ago

The speed difference sneaks up on you - Ruff is so fast there’s usually no perceptible delay but then you use flake8 + isort + pyupgrade and you realize how much you’d gotten used to the minor but noticeable delays. For me, the big win is having a single tool instead of a dozen - like when the last flake8 update happened we had to play plug-in Jenga until everything updated, you have different configuration files for flake8, isort, pyupgrade, pylint, bandit, etc. and inconsistent support for pyproject.toml or ignoring things, etc. None of that is a big problem but it’s nice for it just to be gone entirely.