Ignore DOC errors for stub functions

[charliermarsh]

Summary

Closes #12650.

[github-actions]

ruff-ecosystem results

Linter (stable)

✅ ecosystem check detected no linter changes.

Linter (preview)

ℹ️ ecosystem check detected linter changes. (+0 -10 violations, +0 -0 fixes in 1 projects; 53 projects unchanged)

bokeh/bokeh (+0 -10 violations, +0 -0 fixes)

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

- src/bokeh/application/application.py:344:1: DOC202 Docstring should not have a returns section because the function doesn't return anything
- src/bokeh/application/handlers/handler.py:137:1: DOC202 Docstring should not have a returns section because the function doesn't return anything
- src/bokeh/application/handlers/lifecycle.py:75:1: DOC202 Docstring should not have a returns section because the function doesn't return anything
- src/bokeh/colors/color.py:124:1: DOC202 Docstring should not have a returns section because the function doesn't return anything
- src/bokeh/colors/color.py:141:1: DOC202 Docstring should not have a returns section because the function doesn't return anything
- src/bokeh/colors/color.py:175:1: DOC202 Docstring should not have a returns section because the function doesn't return anything
- src/bokeh/colors/color.py:187:1: DOC202 Docstring should not have a returns section because the function doesn't return anything
- src/bokeh/colors/color.py:199:1: DOC202 Docstring should not have a returns section because the function doesn't return anything
- src/bokeh/core/property/bases.py:306:1: DOC202 Docstring should not have a returns section because the function doesn't return anything
- src/bokeh/core/property/descriptor_factory.py:124:1: DOC202 Docstring should not have a returns section because the function doesn't return anything

Changes by rule (1 rules affected)

code	total	+ violation	- violation	+ fix	- fix
DOC202	10	0	10	0	0

[MichaReiser]

Is this check now covered by is_stub?

[AlexWaygood]

It's covered by the

let Some(function_def) = definition.as_function_def() else {
    return;
};

immediately above

[AlexWaygood]

Is this change just a stylistic preference?

[charliermarsh]

Yeah, I prefer to have the enablement checks separated out from any lint-specific checks. I find it to be a clearer separation, and it would make it easier to identify and automatically rewrite them in the future.

[AlexWaygood]

Makes sense, thanks