[pygrep-hooks]: Detect file-level suppressions comments without rule codes (PGH004)

[MichaReiser]

Summary

This PR stabilizes the preview behavior of PGH004 to also detect blanked file-level noqa comments (and not just line level comments).

This preview behavior was first released with Ruff 0.4.8 (June 2025). There are no open issues or PRs open related to this behavior.

[codspeed-hq]

CodSpeed Performance Report

Merging #16699 will degrade performances by 4.6%

_{Comparing micha/blanked-noqa-file-level (c1c0d1b) with micha/ruff-0.10 (d622137)}

Summary

❌ 1 regressions
✅ 31 untouched benchmarks

⚠️ Please fix the performance issues or acknowledge them on CodSpeed.

Benchmarks breakdown

	Benchmark	BASE	HEAD	Change
❌	red_knot_check_file[incremental]	5.2 ms	5.5 ms	-4.6%

[github-actions]

ruff-ecosystem results

Linter (stable)

ℹ️ ecosystem check detected linter changes. (+5 -0 violations, +0 -0 fixes in 5 projects; 50 projects unchanged)

apache/airflow (+1 -0 violations, +0 -0 fixes)

ruff check --no-cache --exit-zero --ignore RUF9 --no-fix --output-format concise --no-preview --select ALL

+ docs/exts/exampleinclude.py:1:1: PGH004 Use specific rule codes when using `ruff: noqa`

apache/superset (+1 -0 violations, +0 -0 fixes)

ruff check --no-cache --exit-zero --ignore RUF9 --no-fix --output-format concise --no-preview --select ALL

+ tests/integration_tests/superset_test_config_sqllab_backend_persist_off.py:17:1: PGH004 Use specific rule codes when using `ruff: noqa`

pytest-dev/pytest (+1 -0 violations, +0 -0 fixes)

+ testing/code/test_source.py:2:1: PGH004 Use specific rule codes when using `ruff: noqa`

pdm-project/pdm (+1 -0 violations, +0 -0 fixes)

+ src/pdm/installers/__init__.py:1:1: PGH004 Use specific rule codes when using `ruff: noqa`

astropy/astropy (+1 -0 violations, +0 -0 fixes)

+ astropy/io/ascii/__init__.py:3:1: PGH004 Use specific rule codes when using `ruff: noqa`

Changes by rule (1 rules affected)

code	total	+ violation	- violation	+ fix	- fix
PGH004	5	5	0	0	0

Linter (preview)

✅ ecosystem check detected no linter changes.

[MichaReiser]

The ecosystem checks are all true-positives

[dylwil3]

Nice! I do think that we should have a followup issue/PR where we add the feature that this rule has for inline suppressions where it tries to guess if you just forgot a colon