pylint-disable-comment (ODOO047)

Preview (since 0.16.2.3) · Related issues · View source

Derived from the odoo linter.

Fix is sometimes available.

This rule is unstable and in preview. The --preview flag is required for use.

What it does

Checks for # pylint: disable=... comments that suppress checks Ruff now covers, so they can be migrated to Ruff's # noqa: ... format.

A message is considered covered when it matches a Ruff rule name (most pylint-odoo checks were ported under their original names, and many pylint checks exist in Ruff under the same name, e.g. too-many-branches), a pylint-odoo message code (e.g. E8102), or a known rename (e.g. pylint's too-complex is Ruff's complex-structure / C901).

Why is this bad?

After migrating from pylint / pylint-odoo to Ruff, # pylint: disable comments have no effect: Ruff only honors # noqa directives, so the previously silenced diagnostics are reported again despite the suppression comment.

Example

def action_confirm(env):
    env.cr.commit()  # pylint: disable=invalid-commit

Use instead:

def action_confirm(env):
    env.cr.commit()  # noqa: ODOO017

Fix safety

An inline (trailing) disable pragma is rewritten in place and the fix is safe: an inline pylint disable and a noqa both suppress findings on that single line, so the rewrite preserves behavior.

A standalone # pylint: disable comment applies to the rest of the enclosing block, which no single noqa can express. Its fix deletes the pragma and puts a # noqa on each line inside that block where one of the named rules currently fires; a pragma that silences nothing is simply removed. That fix is marked unsafe, because code added to the block later is no longer covered by the suppression, and it is only offered when every rule the pragma names is enabled in the run — a rule that isn't selected can't be observed firing, so dropping its pragma could unsuppress it later.

Messages without a Ruff equivalent are kept in a # pylint: disable comment next to the inserted noqa.