add option to re-run and see previous generated test cases

[2077DevWave]

No description provided.

[gemini-code-assist]

Summary of Changes

Hello @2077DevWave, I'm Gemini Code Assist¹! I'm currently reviewing this pull request and will post my feedback shortly. In the meantime, here's a summary to help you and other reviewers quickly get up to speed!

This pull request delivers a major feature enhancement, enabling users to interact with their past test results. It provides a comprehensive mechanism to browse previous test runs, examine the details of each test case, and selectively re-execute them. This functionality is backed by a significant architectural overhaul in how test data is stored and managed, coupled with an improved user interface for a seamless experience.

Highlights

• Re-run Test Cases Feature: Introduced the ability to view previous test runs, inspect individual test cases, and re-run selected test cases with their original inputs. This significantly enhances the debugging and analysis workflow.
• Refactored Folder and Result Management: The CPSTFolderManager has been extensively refactored and expanded to provide granular control over managing solutions, test runs, and individual test case results, including new methods for creation, retrieval, updating, and deletion of these entities. Branded types were introduced for improved type safety.
• Enhanced Webview UI: The webview interface has been updated with new UI elements to display past runs, list test cases within a run, and allow users to select specific test cases for re-execution. New CSS and JavaScript files were added to support this interactive experience.
• Compilation and Test Runner Improvements: Added a dedicated compilation path for re-running tests that bypasses the generator, and refactored the test runner to accept pre-existing inputs, streamlining the re-run process.
• Service Layer Updates: Key service interfaces and their implementations (CompilationService, OrchestrationService, ResultService, TestRunnerService, UIService) have been updated to support the new re-run functionality and the refined folder management.

Using Gemini Code Assist

The full guide for Gemini Code Assist can be found on our documentation page, here are some quick tips.

Invoking Gemini

You can request assistance from Gemini at any point by creating a comment using either /gemini <command> or @gemini-code-assist <command>. Below is a summary of the supported commands on the current page.

Feature	Command	Description

Customization

To customize Gemini Code Assist for GitHub experience, repository maintainers can create a configuration file and/or provide a custom code review style guide (such as PEP-8 for Python) by creating and adding files to a .gemini/ folder in the base of the repository. Detailed instructions can be found here.

Limitations & Feedback

Gemini Code Assist may make mistakes. Please leave feedback on any instances where its feedback is incorrect or counter productive. You can react with 👍 and 👎 on @gemini-code-assist comments. If you're interested in giving your feedback about your experience with Gemini Code Assist for Github and other Google products, sign up here.

You can also get AI-powered code generation, chat, as well as code reviews directly in the IDE at no cost with the Gemini Code Assist IDE Extension.

Footnotes

1. Review the Privacy Notices, Generative AI Prohibited Use Policy, Terms of Service, and learn how to configure Gemini Code Assist in GitHub here. Gemini can make mistakes, so double check it and use code with caution. ↩

[codecov]

Codecov Report

❌ Patch coverage is 83.76068% with 19 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
src/core/Managers/CPSTFolderManager.ts	89.89%	10 Missing ⚠️
src/core/Managers/FileManager.ts	0.00%	6 Missing ⚠️
src/core/Services/TestRunnerService.ts	25.00%	3 Missing ⚠️

📢 Thoughts on this report? Let us know!

[gemini-code-assist]

Code Review

This pull request introduces a significant new feature allowing users to view past test runs and re-run selected test cases. The implementation includes a substantial and well-done refactoring of the file and result management logic, notably improving type safety with branded types and creating a more granular, maintainable folder management interface. The webview has also been nicely refactored by separating its CSS and JavaScript into dedicated files. My review has identified a few areas for improvement: a potentially risky change that disables integration tests, some naming convention inconsistencies in the new interfaces, inconsistent error handling in the folder manager, and a security vulnerability in the webview's client-side script. Addressing these points will further enhance the quality and robustness of this new functionality.