Better Existing tests performance reporting

[misrasaurabh1]

PR Type

Enhancement, Tests

$\textcolor{red}{\rightarrow}$ $\textcolor{green}{\rightarrow}$ $\rightarrow$

---

Description

• Include timing info in existing tests report

• Group existing tests by test file

• Pass test results in function optimizer

• Add tests for existing_tests_source_for

---

Changes walkthrough 📝

	Relevant files
Enhancement	function_optimizer.py Update optimize_function to pass test results                        codeflash/optimization/function_optimizer.py Moved existing_tests_source_for call into optimization branch Passed original and optimized TestResults parameters Removed legacy early call to fetch existing tests +7/-6      create_pr.py Extend existing_tests_source_for with timing                          codeflash/result/create_pr.py Added original_test_results and optimized_test_results params Grouped tests per file and sorted output Included timing comparisons for each test function Preserved backward compatibility without timing info +59/-2
Tests	test_existing_tests_source_for.py Add comprehensive tests for existing_tests_source_for        tests/test_existing_tests_source_for.py Added tests for timing and grouping logic Covered backward compatibility and missing results Verified sorting and format_time calls Used pytest fixtures for sample data +645/-0

---

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:

⏱️ Estimated effort to review: 3 🔵🔵🔵⚪⚪

🧪 PR contains tests

🔒 No security concerns identified

⚡ Recommended focus areas for review Missing Import The function signature references Optional and Path without showing their imports, which may lead to NameError at runtime. original_test_results: Optional[TestResults] = None, optimized_test_results: Optional[TestResults] = None, ) -> str: test_files = function_to_tests.get(function_qualified_name_with_modules_from_root) Partial Results Handling The logic for including tests when optimized results are missing only checks for any runtime match and can include partial data, but tests expect exclusion when some invocation data is absent. for invocation_id, runtimes in original_runtime_by_test.items(): if invocation_id.test_function_name == test_function_name: original_runtimes.extend(runtimes) for invocation_id, runtimes in optimized_runtime_by_test.items(): if invocation_id.test_function_name == test_function_name: optimized_runtimes.extend(runtimes) if original_runtimes and optimized_runtimes: Unused Variable The newly assigned existing_tests variable in optimize_function is not used later, so existing test insights may not be incorporated into the PR output. existing_tests = existing_tests_source_for( self.function_to_optimize.qualified_name_with_modules_from_root(self.project_root), function_to_all_tests, tests_root=self.test_cfg.tests_root, original_test_results=original_code_baseline.benchmarking_test_results, optimized_test_results=best_optimization.winning_benchmarking_test_results, )

[github-actions]

PR Code Suggestions ✨

Explore these optional code suggestions:

Category	Suggestion	Impact
Possible issue	Pass existing tests into PR creation The existing_tests value is never passed into check_create_pr, so the new test report will be computed but not used. Include it in the call to ensure existing tests data appear in the PR. codeflash/optimization/function_optimizer.py [366-377] existing_tests = existing_tests_source_for( self.function_to_optimize.qualified_name_with_modules_from_root(self.project_root), function_to_all_tests, tests_root=self.test_cfg.tests_root, original_test_results=original_code_baseline.benchmarking_test_results, optimized_test_results=best_optimization.winning_benchmarking_test_results, ) +if concolic_test_str: + generated_tests_str += "\n\n" + concolic_test_str + check_create_pr( + # ... other args ... + existing_tests=existing_tests, +) Suggestion importance[1-10]: 8 __ Why: The computed existing_tests is never used in the check_create_pr call, which would omit existing test data from the PR; passing it fixes a functionality gap.	Medium
General	Move format_time import up Importing format_time inside the loop causes repeated imports and reduces readability. Move the import to the top of the function to avoid runtime overhead and clarify dependencies. codeflash/result/create_pr.py [68-80] +from codeflash.code_utils.time_utils import format_time +# ... for invocation_id, runtimes in optimized_runtime_by_test.items(): if invocation_id.test_function_name == test_function_name: optimized_runtimes.extend(runtimes) if original_runtimes and optimized_runtimes: - # Use minimum timing like the generated tests function does original_time = min(original_runtimes) optimized_time = min(optimized_runtimes) - - from codeflash.code_utils.time_utils import format_time original_str = format_time(original_time) optimized_str = format_time(optimized_time) Suggestion importance[1-10]: 4 __ Why: Moving the format_time import out of the loop reduces repeated imports and improves readability, but has only minor performance impact.	Low
	Simplify grouping with defaultdict The grouping logic can be simplified with defaultdict(list), which makes the code more concise and eliminates the explicit key-check. codeflash/result/create_pr.py [38-45] -test_files_grouped = {} +from collections import defaultdict +test_files_grouped = defaultdict(list) for test_file in test_files: file_path = Path(test_file.tests_in_file.test_file) relative_path = str(file_path.relative_to(tests_root)) - - if relative_path not in test_files_grouped: - test_files_grouped[relative_path] = [] test_files_grouped[relative_path].append(test_file) Suggestion importance[1-10]: 4 __ Why: Using defaultdict(list) makes the grouping logic more concise and readable, but it's a stylistic change without functional impact.	Low

[aseembits93]

LGTM

[misrasaurabh1]

check for optimized_time or original_time = 0

[aseembits93]

@misrasaurabh1 ready to merge

[aseembits93]

This is how the PR would look like - #347