4 ms·
I don’t understand why adding a subcommand to uv is being considered bloat. uv is already a complex tool, but it has excellent documentation. Adding a straight
by darkamaul 1y ago
I don’t understand why adding a subcommand to uv is being considered bloat.
uv is already a complex tool, but it has excellent documentation. Adding a straightforward, self-explanatory subcommand like this doesn’t seem out of place.
- zelphirkalt 1y agoDeveloping a good and configurable formatter is a project almost as complex as uv's main focus, managing packages. As such it will divert time and attention from its main purpose and the outcome is questionable, considering how many bad formatters are out there. For example the "opinionated" black is terrible and has no awareness of semantics.
- alfons_foobar 1y agoThe formatter already exists, my understanding is that this is merely an alias for "uvx ruff"...
- charliermarsh 1y agoWe already develop a formatter: Ruff (https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff). Ruff and uv are built by the same team. `uv format` is just an optional front-end to `ruff format`.
- doctorpangloss 1y ago> I don’t understand why adding a subcommand to uv is being considered bloat. It's simple: - Everything I use and I see: good - Everything I don't use and I see: bloat - Everything I use and I don't see: good - Everything I think I don't use and I don't see: Java