Re:Uv format: Code Formatting Comes to uv (experimentally)
by vovavili on Thursday August 21, 2025 @05:34PM
(#44978360)
Can't you just do this? Why bundle?
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:Uv format: Code Formatting Comes to uv (experimentally)
by IshKebab on Thursday August 21, 2025 @05:58PM
(#44978597)
Because that's a way less obvious command.
Re:Uv format: Code Formatting Comes to uv (experimentally)
by dkdcio on Thursday August 21, 2025 @05:39PM
(#44978410)
that’s a bit slow typically
Re:Uv format: Code Formatting Comes to uv (experimentally)
by replygirl on Thursday August 21, 2025 @05:50PM
(#44978512)
so install ruff?
Re:Uv format: Code Formatting Comes to uv (experimentally)
by dkdcio on Thursday August 21, 2025 @11:31PM
(#44980759)
sure, I do, I was responding to someone who asked why not use uvx to run ruff
Re:Uv format: Code Formatting Comes to uv (experimentally)
by ethan_smith on Thursday August 21, 2025 @10:01PM
(#44980317)
The native integration offers persistent configuration, caching, and project-aware behavior that uvx (which just creates an ephemeral venv) doesn't provide.
Re:Uv format: Code Formatting Comes to uv (experimentally)
by vovavili on Friday August 22, 2025 @01:37PM
(#44987327)
I would imagine that a person who is seriously concerned about any of that would just install a standalone version of ruff. Given the existence of uvx, this addition seems like feature creep to me.
Re:Uv format: Code Formatting Comes to uv (experimentally)
by tspng on Friday August 22, 2025 @03:17AM
(#44981795)
It's not bundled. `uv format` will use the `ruff` binary and more or less run `uvx ruff format` behind the scene.
Re:Uv format: Code Formatting Comes to uv (experimentally)
by HelloNurse on Friday August 22, 2025 @09:17AM
(#44984303)
It's this "more or less" that is a problem. More complication, less reliability.