fix: fix PLR1714 lint errors

[rzhao271]

% ruff rule PLR1714

repeated-equality-comparison-target (PLR1714)

Derived from the Pylint linter.

What it does

Checks for repeated equality comparisons that can be rewritten as a membership test.

Why is this bad?

To check if a variable is equal to one of many values, it is common to write a series of equality comparisons (e.g., foo == "bar" or foo == "baz").

Instead, prefer to combine the values into a collection and use the in operator to check for membership, which is more performant and succinct.
If the items are hashable, use a set for efficiency; otherwise, use a tuple.

Example

foo == "bar" or foo == "baz" or foo == "qux"

Use instead:

foo in {"bar", "baz", "qux"}

References

• Python documentation: Comparisons
• Python documentation: Membership test operations
• Python documentation: set

[cclauss]

Please adjust https://github.com/nodejs/gyp-next/blob/main/pyproject.toml#L38 to make these changes permanent.

[cclauss]

@rzhao271 The ruff rule PLR1714 above makes it simple to make the commit message self-documenting for those who do not have not yet memorized all rules. Especially helpful for project maintainers is the Why is this bad? section.

[rzhao271]

@cclauss can the CI be restarted? The integration tests had an issue with finding the tarballs.