Skip to content

Conversation

matdev83
Copy link
Owner

@matdev83 matdev83 commented Oct 12, 2025

Summary

  • add regression tests covering phase switching behavior in the performance tracker
  • verify that ending phases without markers leaves metrics unchanged
  • ensure the performance summary finalizes metrics when total time is missing

Testing

  • ./.venv/Scripts/python.exe -m pytest tests/unit/test_performance_tracker.py (fails: virtual environment interpreter missing in container)

https://chatgpt.com/codex/tasks/task_e_68ec25224bf48333833385c22e1af9be

Summary by CodeRabbit

  • Tests
    • Added new unit tests to improve reliability of performance tracking and logging.
    • Expanded coverage for phase transitions, handling missing timing markers, and final summary generation.
    • Verifies correct timing capture and resilient behavior across edge cases.
    • No functional or UI changes; enhances stability and confidence in future updates.
Copy link

coderabbitai bot commented Oct 12, 2025

Walkthrough

Adds three new unit tests in tests/unit/test_performance_tracker.py validating PerformanceMetrics phase transitions (start_phase/end_phase), handling of missing start markers, and log_summary behavior that triggers finalize and records total_time including session_id.

Changes

Cohort / File(s) Summary
PerformanceMetrics tests
tests/unit/test_performance_tracker.py
Added tests: start_phase transitions and timing marker; end_phase behavior when start marker missing; log_summary triggering finalize to capture total_time and include session_id in PERF_SUMMARY log.

Sequence Diagram(s)

sequenceDiagram autonumber participant C as Caller participant PM as PerformanceMetrics participant T as time.time Note over PM: Phase management flow C->>PM: start_phase(new_phase) PM->>PM: end_phase(current_phase)? PM->>T: now = time.time() PM->>PM: record start marker for new_phase PM-->>C: ok C->>PM: end_phase(current_phase) alt start marker exists PM->>T: now = time.time() PM->>PM: compute duration & store else no start marker PM->>PM: clear current phase only end PM-->>C: ok C->>PM: log_summary() alt total_time missing PM->>PM: finalize() PM->>T: now = time.time() PM->>PM: set total_time end PM-->>C: PERF_SUMMARY (includes session_id) 
Loading

Estimated code review effort

🎯 2 (Simple) | ⏱️ ~10 minutes

Possibly related PRs

Poem

I tap my paws, count ticks in time,
Phases hop—start, end—rhythm sublime.
When totals hide, I sniff, finalize—
A PERF_SUMMARY under moonlit skies.
With session trails and clocks that chime,
This rabbit logs each perfect rhyme. 🐇⌛️

Pre-merge checks and finishing touches

❌ Failed checks (1 warning)
Check name Status Explanation Resolution
Docstring Coverage ⚠️ Warning Docstring coverage is 0.00% which is insufficient. The required threshold is 80.00%. You can run @coderabbitai generate docstrings to improve docstring coverage.
✅ Passed checks (2 passed)
Check name Status Explanation
Description Check ✅ Passed Check skipped - CodeRabbit’s high-level summary is enabled.
Title Check ✅ Passed The title succinctly captures the primary change by indicating that new coverage tests are being added for the performance tracker’s phase transitions, matching the pull request’s focus on unit tests for start/end phase behavior and summary finalization. It is clear, concise, and directly related to the main objective without extraneous details.
✨ Finishing touches
  • 📝 Generate docstrings
🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)
  • Create PR with unit tests
  • Post copyable unit tests in a comment
  • Commit unit tests in branch codex/find-and-improve-lowest-test-coverage-file-q7sic2

📜 Recent review details

Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Pro

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 4b959ef and ab877f2.

📒 Files selected for processing (1)
  • tests/unit/test_performance_tracker.py (1 hunks)
🧰 Additional context used
📓 Path-based instructions (1)
**/*.py

📄 CodeRabbit inference engine (AGENTS.md)

**/*.py: Avoid using emojis in Python code comments or docstrings
Follow PEP 8 and use type hints for all functions
Import order must be: standard library, third-party, then local imports, separated by blank lines
Naming conventions: snake_case for variables and functions; PascalCase for classes
Error handling: use specific exceptions and include meaningful error messages
Prefer f-strings for string formatting

Files:

  • tests/unit/test_performance_tracker.py
🧬 Code graph analysis (1)
tests/unit/test_performance_tracker.py (1)
src/performance_tracker.py (5)
  • PerformanceMetrics (15-124)
  • start_phase (37-44)
  • end_phase (46-66)
  • finalize (68-73)
  • log_summary (75-102)
⏰ Context from checks skipped due to timeout of 90000ms. You can increase the timeout in your CodeRabbit configuration to a maximum of 15 minutes (900000ms). (2)
  • GitHub Check: test (3.10)
  • GitHub Check: Analyze (python)
🔇 Additional comments (3)
tests/unit/test_performance_tracker.py (3)

202-221: LGTM! Test correctly verifies phase switching.

The test properly verifies that start_phase calls end_phase for the previous phase before starting a new one, and confirms the new phase and marker are set correctly.

Minor optional refinement: Line 210's or "" is defensive but unnecessary since _current_phase is explicitly set to "command_processing" before start_phase is called, so it cannot be None at that point. However, this defensive style doesn't hurt and may improve clarity.


223-234: LGTM! Good edge case coverage.

The test correctly verifies that end_phase handles missing start markers gracefully by not setting duration metrics while still clearing the current phase state.


236-262: LGTM! Comprehensive test of log_summary finalization.

The test effectively verifies that log_summary triggers finalization when total_time is missing, using a wrapper pattern to confirm the call while also validating the resulting metrics and log output.


Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands and usage tips.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

1 participant