Pytest discovery optimization

[KRRT7]

User description

with these changes, the test discovery and test processing is almost as fast as multi processing process_test_files but with less overhead

this should supersede #58, this just implements what @alvin-r says there

---

PR Type

• Enhancement

---

Description

• Enhance parallel test discovery using multiprocessing

• Add progress bar for discovery feedback

• Refactor test processing with caching and deduplication

• Update project version metadata

---

Changes walkthrough 📝

Relevant files

Enhancement

discover_unit_tests.py Enhance parallel test discovery and caching logic                codeflash/discovery/discover_unit_tests.py Introduce module-level regex constants for errors and tests Wrap discovery function in a progress bar for multiprocessing Refactor processing using sets and add goto_cache Optimize parameterized test name handling and deduplication +125/-63 version.py Update project version metadata                                                    codeflash/version.py Update version string to 0.10.3.post7.dev0+86aa1cd6 Refresh version tuple with detailed parts

---

Need help?

Type /help how to ... in the comments thread for any questions about PR-Agent usage.

Check out the documentation for more information.

[github-actions]

PR Reviewer Guide 🔍

Here are some key observations to aid the review process:

🎫 Ticket compliance analysis 🔶 58 - Partially compliant Compliant requirements: Enhanced parallel test discovery using multiprocessing Progress bar feedback integration Refactored test processing with caching and deduplication improvements Version metadata update Non-compliant requirements: Requires further human verification: Verify performance improvements on systems with fewer than 25 files

⏱️ Estimated effort to review: 4 🔵🔵🔵🔵⚪

🧪 No relevant tests

🔒 No security concerns identified

⚡ Recommended focus areas for review Type Consistency Ensure consistent handling of file path types in filtering logic using discover_only_these_tests to avoid mismatches between Path objects and string representations. if ( discover_only_these_tests and test_obj.test_file not in discover_only_these_tests ): continue file_to_test_map[test_obj.test_file].append(test_obj) # Within these test files, find the project functions they are referring to and return their names/locations return process_test_files(file_to_test_map, cfg) def discover_tests_unittest( cfg: TestConfig, discover_only_these_tests: list[str] | None = None ) -> dict[str, list[FunctionCalledInTest]]: tests_root: Path = cfg.tests_root loader: unittest.TestLoader = unittest.TestLoader() tests: unittest.TestSuite = loader.discover(str(tests_root)) file_to_test_map: defaultdict[str, list[TestsInFile]] = defaultdict(list) def get_test_details(_test: unittest.TestCase) -> TestsInFile | None: _test_function, _test_module, _test_suite_name = ( _test._testMethodName, _test.__class__.__module__, _test.__class__.__qualname__, ) _test_module_path = Path(_test_module.replace(".", os.sep)).with_suffix(".py") _test_module_path = tests_root / _test_module_path if not _test_module_path.exists() or ( discover_only_these_tests and str(_test_module_path) not in discover_only_these_tests ): Caching Robustness Verify the caching mechanism in process_test_files, particularly the use of goto_cache and cache key construction, to ensure it handles definitions reliably. cache_key = (name.full_name, name.module_name) try: if cache_key in goto_cache: definition = goto_cache[cache_key] else: definition = name.goto( follow_imports=True, follow_builtin_imports=False ) goto_cache[cache_key] = definition except Exception as e: logger.debug(str(e)) Parameter Extraction Validate the splitting logic for parameterized test names (using PYTEST_PARAMETERIZED_TEST_NAME_REGEX) to handle cases with unexpected formats gracefully. function_name = PYTEST_PARAMETERIZED_TEST_NAME_REGEX.split( function.test_function )[0] parameters = PYTEST_PARAMETERIZED_TEST_NAME_REGEX.split( function.test_function )[1]

[github-actions]

PR Code Suggestions ✨

No code suggestions found for the PR.

[misrasaurabh1]

great work, thank you!

[misrasaurabh1]

@KRRT7 you mentioned that there were some cases where you found the behavior is different. Can you make test cases for the failing cases and push here? Also, lets resolve and merge this quickly

[KRRT7]

@alvin-r we can merge this as is, this doesn't cause the issues I commented on elsewhere and such can be merged cleanly, this already has a major performance boost, there's still work to be done but for now it's fine.

[alvin-r]

lets go