Applying rule UP032 in favour of UP030/31

[ihavran]

Hey,

as I was recently upgrading codebase, I became aware of unusual behavior in certain rules in pyupgrade. I didn't find a thread about similiar topic, so I decided to open one here.

When I applied rule UP030/31, I expected rule UP032 to be applied in next call I made. But this wasn't the case at all times - actually it was pretty inconsistent when it was applied (I'm not aware of any specific rule).

There is not additional information about applying these rules together, but my assumption was, that rules UP030/31 breaks rule UP032 and therefore change should be applied.

Is there some explanation for this behavior?

Thanks in advance

[charliermarsh]

Before I respond in more detail, are you able to provide an example of a string that was migrated via 30/31, but not 32?

[charliermarsh]

Thank you! I think that's just a bug in the rule. Can fix.

[ihavran]

thanks @charliermarsh !

[charliermarsh]

The reason this isn't being applied (which isn't clear) is that it would cause the string to exceed the configured line width. (If you increase the line width to, like, 120, the error is restored.) In this example, the string already exceeds the line width, so we should flag it anyway...

[charliermarsh]

Okay, that specific issue has been resolved on main. Hopefully that helps!

[ihavran]

Thanks again for explanation and quick resolve 🙏