Saw you were blocked by the neotest PR, so got it merged 😄 Very cool to see this!

I think that the PR is ready for testing. If someone has the time to checkout to this branch and report any problem I would be grateful.
Unfortunately jest command with jsdom test environment can be really slow (in my bigger project it can take up to 7 seconds) therefore the discovery is slow. If anyone has any ideas that can speed up this process it would be nice to use it here.

I'm going to test this.

I have tested this a bit. Works very well. I really like the idea of resorting back to jest to discover the tests. This saves reimplementing all the logic.

Do you think this is mergable?

I think after resolving conflicts its mergable. I'll try to resolve them today

I think I found some bugs. Consider the following test:

describe.each([null, undefined])('thing', (value) => {
    test('is null', () => {
        expect(value).toBeNull();
    });

    test('is undefined', () => {
        expect(value).toBeUndefined();
    });

    test('is not truthy', () => {
        expect(value).not.toBeTruthy();
    });
});

1. Running the whole file marks the describe block as failed, the first test as failed, the second one as success (WRONG), the last one as success.
2. Running only the second test marks it as success (WRONG)
3. I don't know if this is because of your changes, but see the following test:

describe('thing', () => {
    const value = null;

    test(`is null`, () => {
        expect(value).toBeNull();
    });

    test('is undefined', () => {
        expect(value).toBeUndefined();
    });

    test('is not truthy', () => {
        expect(value).not.toBeTruthy();
    });
});

Now try running only the first test (with the backticks in the testname). It does not work, this test does not get a success/failure symbol, instead the whole describe block is being run.

So about the first scenario -> this is a limitation (or not) of the plugin. If you have describe.each([null, undefined])('thing', in your describe and you dont use each name in test name (e.g. thing $s) all the tests will have the same name:
from first run: "thing is null", "thing is undefined", "thing is not truthy"
and from the second run: "thing is null", "thing is undefined", "thing is not truthy"
so we cannot get the names from the output. If you look into some other IDE's there is the same problem there but maybe more visible. I have no idea on how to fix it in the plugin. In the code it would be

describe.each([null, undefined])('thing $s', (value) => {
    test('is null', () => {
        expect(value).toBeNull();
    });

About the second scenario: its the problem on master branch #46

Then I'm fine with merging it :)

I use this for months now and it seems usable and stable. Any option of merging and/or reviewing it @haydenmeade ?