Run Python formatting check in tidy on CI

[Kobzol]

I don't think that there's a reason why we should ignore Python formatting on CI, when we already check Python lints and C++ formatting.

r? @onur-ozkan

[onur-ozkan]

Thanks! Waiting for CI.

[onur-ozkan]

@bors r+

[bors]

📌 Commit 787c2a2 has been approved by onur-ozkan

It is now in the queue for this repository.

[bors]

⌛ Testing commit 787c2a2 with merge 5190fd3...

[rust-log-analyzer]

The job aarch64-apple failed! Check out the build log: (web) (plain)

Click to see the possible cause of the failure (guessed by this bot)

test [mir-opt] tests/mir-opt/unreachable_enum_branching.rs ... ok

failures:

---- [mir-opt] tests/mir-opt/strip_debuginfo.rs#ALL stdout ----
thread '[mir-opt] tests/mir-opt/strip_debuginfo.rs#ALL' panicked at src/tools/compiletest/src/runtest.rs:213:30:
called `Result::unwrap()` on an `Err` value: Os { code: 17, kind: AlreadyExists, message: "File exists" }


failures:
    [mir-opt] tests/mir-opt/strip_debuginfo.rs#ALL

[bors]

💔 Test failed - checks-actions

[Kobzol]

Looks spurious, or at least definitely unrelated to this PR.

@bors retry

[bors]

⌛ Testing commit 787c2a2 with merge 372442f...

[bors]

☀️ Test successful - checks-actions
Approved by: onur-ozkan
Pushing 372442f to master...

[rust-timer]

Finished benchmarking commit (372442f): comparison URL.

Overall result: no relevant changes - no action needed

@rustbot label: -perf-regression

Instruction count

This benchmark run did not return any relevant results for this metric.

Max RSS (memory usage)

This benchmark run did not return any relevant results for this metric.

Cycles

Results (primary 12.6%, secondary 2.0%)

This is a less reliable metric that may be of interest but was not used to determine the overall result at the top of this comment.

	mean	range	count
Regressions ❌ (primary)	12.6%	[1.7%, 28.3%]	15
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	2.0%	[2.0%, 2.0%]	1
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-	-	0
All ❌✅ (primary)	12.6%	[1.7%, 28.3%]	15

Binary size

This benchmark run did not return any relevant results for this metric.

Bootstrap: 760.671s -> 762.936s (0.30%)
Artifact size: 325.55 MiB -> 325.53 MiB (-0.01%)

[Kobzol]

Well, that was a particularly nasty walltime spike on html5ever..