pretty print tables with rich

[atravitz]

downstream of #1244

I'm open to making this a --pretty flag if we want to preserve backwards compatibility. This would be a good idea if users regularly use >> output.csv instead of -o output.csv. This isn't anything we suggest in the docs, so I'm not sure if it's something people actually do.

Checklist

• Added a news entry

Developers certificate of origin

• I certify that this contribution is covered by the MIT License here and the Developer Certificate of Origin at https://developercertificate.org/.

[mikemhenry]

I vote it is pretty by default and we can add a --tsv option for those who like to > for scripting (that way we can also do stuff like make sure nothing else ends up in stdout that would break the table)

[IAlibay]

News item!

[mikemhenry]

Not sure if you just haven't written tests yet (since it is a draft) but I think that is the only thing missing

[mikemhenry]

Oh yes and +1 for a news item, but that can wait until the dust settles on how we want to do this and what new flags exist

[mikemhenry]

looks good! One test question and needs a news item but other than that LGTMM!

[codecov]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 92.73%. Comparing base (6b3f501) to head (aee55ec).
Report is 258 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #1246      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   92.75%   92.73%   -0.03%     
==========================================
  Files         141      141              
  Lines       10813    10845      +32     
==========================================
+ Hits        10030    10057      +27     
- Misses        783      788       +5     

Flag	Coverage Δ
fast-tests	92.73% <100.00%> (?)
slow-tests	?

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

• ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.

[mikemhenry]

oh and a test for the rich printing as well

[atravitz]

oh and a test for the rich printing as well

this is tricky because I'll need to mock the terminal width, since that affects text wrapping. do you know how to do this off the top of your head? otherwise i'll open an issue to follow up later, and leave it as a smoke test for now.

[mikemhenry]

Fine with a smoke test, this is how you can capture the output:

from io import StringIO
from rich.console import Console
console = Console(file=StringIO())
console.print("[bold red]Hello[/] World")
str_output = console.file.getvalue()

I think we have a few "levels" of testing:

1. The strictest would be to compare the whole output to what we expect
2. The second would be just checking if certain key numbers are in the output
3. The lowest is just a smoke test that the makes sure the call works

I am happy with 3, but I think if 1 takes you 30 minutes it would be worth it.

[github-actions]

No API break detected ✅

[mikemhenry]

Oh btw since the smoke test is in there, I will give this an approval so it can get merged in now