Stabilize for-loop-set-mutations (FURB142)

[dylwil3]

No description provided.

[github-actions]

ruff-ecosystem results

Linter (stable)

ℹ️ ecosystem check detected linter changes. (+25 -0 violations, +0 -0 fixes in 4 projects; 51 projects unchanged)

apache/airflow (+11 -0 violations, +0 -0 fixes)

ruff check --no-cache --exit-zero --ignore RUF9 --no-fix --output-format concise --no-preview --select ALL

+ airflow-core/src/airflow/utils/dag_edges.py:74:17: FURB142 [*] Use of `set.add()` in a for loop
+ dev/breeze/src/airflow_breeze/utils/docker_command_utils.py:525:5: FURB142 [*] Use of `set.add()` in a for loop
+ dev/breeze/src/airflow_breeze/utils/provider_dependencies.py:53:9: FURB142 [*] Use of `set.add()` in a for loop
+ dev/breeze/src/airflow_breeze/utils/selective_checks.py:952:17: FURB142 [*] Use of `set.add()` in a for loop
+ dev/breeze/src/airflow_breeze/utils/selective_checks.py:958:17: FURB142 [*] Use of `set.add()` in a for loop
+ dev/breeze/src/airflow_breeze/utils/selective_checks.py:986:17: FURB142 [*] Use of `set.add()` in a for loop
+ dev/stats/calculate_statistics_provider_testing_issues.py:110:5: FURB142 [*] Use of `set.add()` in a for loop
+ dev/stats/calculate_statistics_provider_testing_issues.py:117:5: FURB142 [*] Use of `set.add()` in a for loop
+ providers/amazon/src/airflow/providers/amazon/aws/hooks/glue_catalog.py:124:13: FURB142 [*] Use of `set.add()` in a for loop
+ providers/amazon/src/airflow/providers/amazon/aws/hooks/glue_catalog.py:82:13: FURB142 [*] Use of `set.add()` in a for loop
+ scripts/tools/list-integrations.py:67:9: FURB142 [*] Use of `set.add()` in a for loop

apache/superset (+6 -0 violations, +0 -0 fixes)

ruff check --no-cache --exit-zero --ignore RUF9 --no-fix --output-format concise --no-preview --select ALL

+ superset/extensions/__init__.py:81:13: FURB142 [*] Use of `set.add()` in a for loop
+ superset/utils/dashboard_import_export.py:30:5: FURB142 [*] Use of `set.add()` in a for loop
+ superset/utils/pandas_postprocessing/pivot.py:89:13: FURB142 [*] Use of `set.add()` in a for loop
+ superset/viz.py:1662:13: FURB142 [*] Use of `set.add()` in a for loop
+ tests/integration_tests/security_tests.py:1504:9: FURB142 [*] Use of `set.add()` in a for loop
+ tests/integration_tests/security_tests.py:86:5: FURB142 [*] Use of `set.add()` in a for loop

bokeh/bokeh (+1 -0 violations, +0 -0 fixes)

ruff check --no-cache --exit-zero --ignore RUF9 --no-fix --output-format concise --no-preview --select ALL

+ tests/unit/bokeh/document/test_models.py:113:9: FURB142 [*] Use of `set.add()` in a for loop

zulip/zulip (+7 -0 violations, +0 -0 fixes)

ruff check --no-cache --exit-zero --ignore RUF9 --no-fix --output-format concise --no-preview --select ALL

+ zerver/lib/export.py:1852:9: FURB142 [*] Use of `set.add()` in a for loop
+ zerver/lib/streams.py:1668:9: FURB142 [*] Use of `set.add()` in a for loop
+ zerver/lib/subscription_info.py:690:13: FURB142 [*] Use of `set.add()` in a for loop
+ zerver/lib/thumbnail.py:295:5: FURB142 [*] Use of `set.add()` in a for loop
+ zerver/lib/user_groups.py:676:13: FURB142 [*] Use of `set.add()` in a for loop
+ zerver/tests/test_docs.py:335:9: FURB142 [*] Use of `set.add()` in a for loop
+ zerver/tests/test_docs.py:342:13: FURB142 [*] Use of `set.add()` in a for loop

Changes by rule (1 rules affected)

code	total	+ violation	- violation	+ fix	- fix
FURB142	25	25	0	0	0

Linter (preview)

✅ ecosystem check detected no linter changes.

[ntBre]

Not sure if it's a blocker, but there's a new issue on this one: #18575

[dylwil3]

Hmm... I think it could be a blocker, actually. The fix would be to check whether the loop variable is used outside of the loop (this is already done in for-loop-writes so we can steal another helper function).

But I think this ends up being a fairly significant change if someone has a lot of violations in the same scope that re-use the loop variable name. (For example - our test fixture fails to converge after 10 iterations if we make this behavior change).

Not sure how much of a big deal that is in practice, but probably worth delaying stabilization until that behavior has sat in preview for a round.