Ruff v0.16.0 – Significant new updates – 413 default rules up from 59

Re:Ruff v0.16.0 – Significant new updates – 413 default rule... by maratc on Sunday July 26, 2026 @01:43PM (#49060433)

The linked article says that ruff now has 413 default rules -- instead of 59 previously. Do I understand it right that all the projects that were using ruff were 100% conformant to 59 rules yesterday but likely not conformant to 413 rules today, which will cause breakage all across the board? Likely immediately followed by a swarm of pull requests all formatting their code in conformance to whatever these new (413-59) rules are?

There's no "tool replacement" going on here.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Ruff v0.16.0 – Significant new updates – 413 default rule... by MawKKe on Sunday July 26, 2026 @02:49PM (#49061119)

Well, that's the danger of using software without version pinning.

Also, usually tools like Ruff can be configured to enable/disable project-specific formatting rules (via a config file), allowing you to suppress the defaults you disagree with, or whose consequence you don't want to deal with _right now_. Some tools might even support suppressing specific rules per-file, so you can migrate codebase over time instead of in one go.

Having a config that explicitly defines the rules enforced in the project is really useful, and perhaps even crucial the bigger the project grows.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Ruff v0.16.0 – Significant new updates – 413 default rule... by maratc on Sunday July 26, 2026 @03:14PM (#49061379)

The options you suggest seem to be either (a) feed the bot now (halt development and reformat all code) or (b) under-pin/suppress and feed the bot later, probably dealing with people adding more non-conformant code to already-reformatted files.

You will probably have to do it all over again when these guys release even newer and shinier 0.17.0, with even more rules.

I can't understand how the option of not feeding the bot eludes people.

[ Parent | on HN ]