Chat: Add support for cody.chat.preInstruction in the new preamble #2255
Conversation
|
@beyang @dominiccooney @abeatrix before I go adding tests… does this approach look sound, or would you prefer it another way? |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This looks good to me.
We have that "typed" configuration layer, tests for defaults, etc. but because this is simply "any string" I don't think we need to plumb through that here? @philipp-spiess do you have thoughts?
|
@dominiccooney I've just added some tests, if you could quickly give it a re-review |
| @@ -0,0 +1,87 @@ | |||
| import { afterEach, describe, expect, it, vi } from 'vitest' | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Would have been nice to have an e2e test for this, but our e2e tests aren't very end-to-end and don't go through our prompt construction gear. I glanced at the integration tests, but they seem to be all marked as skipped because the getTranscript function is broken atm. So a unit test it is!
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Wow, I am surprised that the e2e tests somehow avoid prompt construction.
Unit test seems perfect for this. We will be waiting an hour for test results if we have e2e tests for everything.
This adds support for the
cody.chat.preInstructionsetting in simplified chat, especially important now we have a "Chat Settings" button in the top of the chat editor:Fix #2165
Test plan