Future of string_processing

[JelleZijlstra]

We merged string processing in May 2020 (#1132), almost four years ago. A few months later, I put the feature behind a flag because there were too many related bugs (#1609). Four years later, we're still in basically the same state: most of the open issues in C: preview style Issues with the preview and unstable style. Add the name of the responsible feature in the title. are about string processing.

I'm also increasingly convinced that string_processing's core feature, splitting up long strings, would be exceedingly controversial if we ever did turn it on by default. It is just too hard for a tool to figure out how to split a string in a way that makes sense to readers of the code. However, there are other things that string_processing does, and some of those are valuable and could perhaps be split off.

So my proposal is:

• Give up on splitting strings automatically; Black will simply not do that
• Split out any other useful features from string-processing into separate preview features that we can reasonably hope to enable in next year's stable style.

If you're interested in getting any part of string_processing into stable Black, please contribute a PR moving it to a separate preview feature.

I ran string_processing on my work codebase and noticed a few specific changes that could be split out. I'll list them in a separate comment.

[JelleZijlstra]

Here are some examples of changes that string-processing makes in my codebase that I'd consider accepting in a standalone preview feature:

• Add parentheses around a string so it fits in the line limit

         xxxxxx = xx.xxxxxxx.XXXXXxxxxXxxXxfxxxxxx(
-            xxxxx_xxxxxxx_x3_xxxx_xxxxxxxx=f"x3://{XXX_X3_XXXXXX}/{XXXX_XXXXXXX_X3_XXXX_XXXXXXXX}",
+            xxxxx_xxxxxxx_x3_xxxx_xxxxxxxx=(
+                f"x3://{XXX_X3_XXXXXX}/{XXXX_XXXXXXX_X3_XXXX_XXXXXXXX}"
+            ),
             xxxxx_xxx=[

• Merge implicitly concatenated strings if the result fits in the line limit

     xxx_xxxxxxx_xxxxxxxx = (
-        "XXX(XX(xx XXXXXXX '{xxxxx_xx}' XXX '{xxx_xx}', {xxx}, 0)) "
-        "XX {xxx}_x{xxxxxx}"
+        "XXX(XX(xx XXXXXXX '{xxxxx_xx}' XXX '{xxx_xx}', {xxx}, 0)) XX {xxx}_x{xxxxxx}"
     )

• Combination of both, looks much nicer

     name_to_base_expression = {
-        "view": f"CASE WHEN (playtime >= {VIEW_THRESHOLD} "
-        "or has_unmute) THEN 1 ELSE 0 END",
+        "view": (
+            f"CASE WHEN (playtime >= {VIEW_THRESHOLD} or has_unmute) THEN 1 ELSE 0 END"
+        ),
     }

• Remove f from parts of an implicitly concatenated f-string that don't have placeholders

             [
-                f"xxxxxx /xxxx/xxxxxxx/xxxx_xxxxxxx_xxxxx_xx.xx "
+                "xxxxxx /xxxx/xxxxxxx/xxxx_xxxxxxx_xxxxx_xx.xx "
                 f"--xxxxxxxx_xxxx {xxxxx_xxxxxxx_xxxxx} "
                 f"--xxxxxx_xxx {xxxxx_xxxxxx_xxxx} "
-                f"--xx_xxxx "
+                "--xx_xxxx "
                 f" {xxxxxx_xxxxxxx_xxxxx_xxx} "
                 f" {xx_xxx_fxxxx} "
             ]

[zanieb]

My 2-cents: I switched to Black's preview mode just for this feature. Otherwise, string processing is the vast majority of the time I spend manually formatting code. I would love to see this reach a place where it can be stabilized. I never had any problems with it, although I do understand there are many edge cases. I think splitting it into individual features makes a lot of sense so you can make incremental progress. I find splitting long strings really valuable, but understand it's a tough problem — we've been hesitant to tackle it in Ruff as well.

[carschandler]

Agreed with @zanieb this feature is the main reason I use Black over Ruff. Thinking about splitting all of my strings manually gives me Java-scented nightmares.