Support ruff for quality checking

[AdamWill]

Ruff seems to be the cool new kid on the block for Python linting. Could we have diff-cover support it for quality checking? At a quick look I guess it might be pretty simple if it works nicely with RegexBasedDriver, if I get time to try it myself I will do...

[Bachmann1234]

Sorry, responded from a work account before.

100% open to a pr on this. I don't typically add features to diff cover myself since I don't actively work on any python projects right now and I would prefer anything that gets added has at least one person who intends on using the feature.

I see my role as maintaining dependencies, keeping python up to date, managing prs that come in and helping with issues when there is enough detail for me to understand and reproduce the problem.

[Gary-LePeep]

I would also like to see this feature developed, I definitely find it useful since ruff is like the all-around linter

[ssbarnea]

My team switched to ruff an year ago, ~4 months later we removed flake8 and later we reduces our use of pylint and pydocstyle gradually as each new version of ruff covered extra checks done by these. At some point we will likely remove pylint and pydocstyle too. -- we use pre-commit hooks to orchestrate running these.

PS. We already started to use ruff reformatting, but we run black after it too to cover for the very few cases where these diverge.

[kingbuzzman]

Expect a preliminary PR soon.

[kingbuzzman]

@Bachmann1234 this could be closed

[Bachmann1234]

I typically close on release

[kingbuzzman]

@Bachmann1234 can we do a release soon? There a good bit in there now to justify it. Plus, I'd like to use the ruff stuff 😇

[Bachmann1234]

Yeah I'll do one today.

[Bachmann1234]

Try out https://pypi.org/project/diff-cover/9.3.0/ yall! Big shoutout for @kingbuzzman

[fellnerse]

The readme probably needs an update: It should say ruff.check instead of ruff check

[kingbuzzman]

@fellnerse you're right, ive addressed it here