From 386974f0ddd57f7cbdaa6e58c13a82bd90ee364d Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: dosisod <39638017+dosisod@users.noreply.github.com>
Date: Wed, 5 Oct 2022 15:19:41 -0700
Subject: [PATCH] Cleanup the "in tuple" check:

* Remove the "performance" note from the --explain docs since the performance
is the same in both cases, and instead say that it is for style/consistency.

* Add support for parsing `not in` expressions.

* Update message to use the "replace x with y" format.
---
 refurb/checks/iterable/in_tuple.py | 27 ++++++++++++++++-----------
 test/data/err_109.py               |  3 +++
 test/data/err_109.txt              | 13 +++++++------
 3 files changed, 26 insertions(+), 17 deletions(-)

diff --git a/refurb/checks/iterable/in_tuple.py b/refurb/checks/iterable/in_tuple.py
index c127ac4..314099d 100644
--- a/refurb/checks/iterable/in_tuple.py
+++ b/refurb/checks/iterable/in_tuple.py
@@ -8,8 +8,8 @@
 @dataclass
 class ErrorInfo(Error):
     """
-    Since tuples cannot change value over time, it is more performant to use
-    them in `for` loops, generators, etc.:
+    Since tuple, list, and set literals can be used with the `in` operator, it
+    is best to pick one and stick with it.
 
     Bad:
 
@@ -31,23 +31,28 @@ class ErrorInfo(Error):
     """
 
     code = 109
-    msg: str = "Use `in (x, y, z)` instead of `in [x, y, z]`"
+
+
+def error_msg(oper: str) -> str:
+    return f"Replace `{oper} [x, y, z]` with `{oper} (x, y, z)`"
 
 
 def check(
     node: ComparisonExpr | ForStmt | GeneratorExpr, errors: list[Error]
 ) -> None:
     match node:
-        case (
-            ComparisonExpr(
-                operators=["in"],
-                operands=[_, ListExpr() as expr],
-            )
-            | ForStmt(expr=ListExpr() as expr)
+        case ComparisonExpr(
+            operators=["in" | "not in" as oper],
+            operands=[_, ListExpr() as expr],
         ):
-            errors.append(ErrorInfo(expr.line, expr.column))
+            errors.append(ErrorInfo(expr.line, expr.column, error_msg(oper)))
+
+        case ForStmt(expr=ListExpr() as expr):
+            errors.append(ErrorInfo(expr.line, expr.column, error_msg("in")))
 
         case GeneratorExpr():
             for expr in node.sequences:  # type: ignore
                 if isinstance(expr, ListExpr):
-                    errors.append(ErrorInfo(expr.line, expr.column))
+                    errors.append(
+                        ErrorInfo(expr.line, expr.column, error_msg("in"))
+                    )
diff --git a/test/data/err_109.py b/test/data/err_109.py
index 5d66504..33078c3 100644
--- a/test/data/err_109.py
+++ b/test/data/err_109.py
@@ -15,6 +15,9 @@
 if 1 in [1, 2, 3]:
     pass
 
+if 1 not in [1, 2, 3]:
+    pass
+
 
 # these will not
 
diff --git a/test/data/err_109.txt b/test/data/err_109.txt
index d5a4932..b9279c2 100644
--- a/test/data/err_109.txt
+++ b/test/data/err_109.txt
@@ -1,6 +1,7 @@
-test/data/err_109.py:3:10 [FURB109]: Use `in (x, y, z)` instead of `in [x, y, z]`
-test/data/err_109.py:6:13 [FURB109]: Use `in (x, y, z)` instead of `in [x, y, z]`
-test/data/err_109.py:8:13 [FURB109]: Use `in (x, y, z)` instead of `in [x, y, z]`
-test/data/err_109.py:11:22 [FURB109]: Use `in (x, y, z)` instead of `in [x, y, z]`
-test/data/err_109.py:12:14 [FURB109]: Use `in (x, y, z)` instead of `in [x, y, z]`
-test/data/err_109.py:15:9 [FURB109]: Use `in (x, y, z)` instead of `in [x, y, z]`
+test/data/err_109.py:3:10 [FURB109]: Replace `in [x, y, z]` with `in (x, y, z)`
+test/data/err_109.py:6:13 [FURB109]: Replace `in [x, y, z]` with `in (x, y, z)`
+test/data/err_109.py:8:13 [FURB109]: Replace `in [x, y, z]` with `in (x, y, z)`
+test/data/err_109.py:11:22 [FURB109]: Replace `in [x, y, z]` with `in (x, y, z)`
+test/data/err_109.py:12:14 [FURB109]: Replace `in [x, y, z]` with `in (x, y, z)`
+test/data/err_109.py:15:9 [FURB109]: Replace `in [x, y, z]` with `in (x, y, z)`
+test/data/err_109.py:18:13 [FURB109]: Replace `not in [x, y, z]` with `not in (x, y, z)`