Refactor evaluate ast to improve readability

[CalOmnie]

This PR does 3 main things:

• create a common_params variable for use instead of retyping state, static_tools, custom_tools, authorized_imports every time
• Replace the elif machine with a match statement
• Create evaluate_ast_partial, a partial evaluation of evaluate_ast allowing it to be used with map

I'll concede the later 2 are more of an opinionated choice than a straight improvement to readability, let me know if you think so too and I'll discard them.

[sysradium]

This requires python >= 3.10. Wonder if maintainers are ok with this 🤔

[CalOmnie]

Yeah it is a fair concern, I checked in the project's pyproject.toml and the Python version is requires-python = ">=3.10" so it should be fine, but if this refactor is the only thing preventing the project from handling python 3.9 it's a tough sell.

[sysradium]

Honestly, no idea. They don't use tox here to test against different versions. I guess we need to add that. Maybe that ship has already sailed and adding matching is fine :)

[CalOmnie]

@albertvillanova I noticed this change was not getting much traction so I changed it to its most basic form. Let me know if that works for you.

[albertvillanova]

Hi, it seems you didn't run the quality checks before pushing your PR.

Here you can find the contributing guideline: https://github.com/huggingface/smolagents/blob/main/CONTRIBUTING.md

[CalOmnie]

Hey @albertvillanova thanks for taking the time to look at this, I did run the quality checks, but not with the same command as the CI, hence the discrepancy (I did make quality instead of uv run ruff format examples src tests utils)

This is fixed now, is there an issue tracking the update of the Makefile/pyproject to add a dependency on uv/update the targets? I can pick that up if you guys are a bit tight on bandwidth.

[albertvillanova]

Thanks.