linting: Always use latest versions of linting tools; Upgrade clang-format config.

[LinZhihao-723]

References

Description

The current code base was formatted by out-dated linting tools. When running gh workflow, linting check will fail. This PR has the following updates:

• Update all linting tools to the latest pypi released versions.
• Update clang-format config with new features added in version 18. In addition, format yaml file to match CLP core style. Please check this PR for more details: linting: Always use latest versions of linting tools; Upgrade clang-format config. clp#384
• Refactor everything after upgrading linter versions.
  Note: ideally, we can drop the versions specified in requirements-dev.txt to ensure it always uses the latest one. However, adding the version there would help us keep track of which version of the config file we used to setup these linting tools.

Validation performed

• Ensured workflow passed.

[davemarco]

I ran tests and linters with no errors.

[davemarco]

It may make sense to add -U to pip install -r requirements-dev.txt in the README so devs upgrade to latest version of linter

[LinZhihao-723]

It may make sense to add -U to pip install -r requirements-dev.txt in the README so devs upgrade to latest version of linter

It is expected to run with a virtual env so upgrade is not necessarily needed

[davemarco]

I know clp uses poetry, but not sure if the github action linter uses the lock file from the package. It is probably overkill for this repo. I am okay with as is

[davemarco]

It may make sense to add -U to pip install -r requirements-dev.txt in the README so devs upgrade to latest version of linter

It is expected to run with a virtual env so upgrade is not necessarily needed

Makes sense

[LinZhihao-723]

I know clp uses poetry, but not sure if the github action linter uses the lock file from the package. It is probably overkill for this repo. I am okay with as is

Sorry I didn't quite get this comment...

[davemarco]

Sorry I didn't quite get this comment...

I know clp uses poetry, but not sure if the github action linter uses the lock file from the package. It is probably overkill for this repo. I am okay with as is

Sorry I didn't quite get this comment...

just bringing the linters will auto update for the action, which could cause the workflow to fail even if it ran fine locally

[kirkrodrigues]

Can we use the same PR title we used in y-scope/clp?

[LinZhihao-723]

Can we use the same PR title we used in y-scope/clp?

sure