test: add VS Code integration test suite for RustMetricsAnalyzer

[github-actions]

🤖 This PR was created by Repo Assist, an automated AI assistant.

Summary

Adds src/test/metricsAnalyzer/languages/rustAnalyzer.test.ts — the VS Code integration test suite for RustMetricsAnalyzer.

Every other language analyzer already has a corresponding test file in this directory (C#, Go, Java, JavaScript, jsLike, Python, TSX, TypeScript). This PR completes the set by adding the missing Rust counterpart.

Test Coverage

The new test suite covers:

Suite	Cases
Basic Function Analysis	simple fn, if expression, multiple fns, empty source, no functions
Control Flow	for, while, loop, match, nested, else-if clause
Boolean Operators	&&, ||, chained operators
Impl Methods	qualified names (Struct::method), complexity, multiple methods
Closures	top-level (no increment), nested (increment)
Position Information	startLine accuracy
Static Factory Method	RustMetricsAnalyzer.analyzeFile()

Test Status

• ✅ npm run compile — passed, no TypeScript errors
• ✅ npm run lint — passed, no ESLint issues
• ✅ npm run test:unit — 100/100 passing (Rust unit tests already in unit.test.ts)
• i️ VS Code integration tests (npm test) require VS Code download — not runnable in sandboxed CI environment; infrastructure-only limitation

Warning

Firewall blocked 1 domain

The following domain was blocked by the firewall during workflow execution:

• releaseassets.githubusercontent.com

To allow these domains, add them to the network.allowed list in your workflow frontmatter:

network:
  allowed:
    - defaults
    - "releaseassets.githubusercontent.com"

See Network Configuration for more information.

Generated by 🌈 Repo Assist, see workflow run. Learn more.

To install this agentic workflow, run

gh aw add githubnext/agentics/workflows/repo-assist.md@79c99dfd73f3b7ad8ab2b0f4944838018dbe4736

[Copilot]

Pull request overview

Adds a VS Code integration test file for the existing RustMetricsAnalyzer, aligning Rust with the other language analyzers’ integration test coverage under src/test/metricsAnalyzer/languages/.

Changes:

• Added rustAnalyzer.test.ts integration tests for Rust function detection, complexity increments, qualified impl method names, and position reporting.
• Included scenarios for control-flow constructs (if/else, loops, match), boolean operators, and closures.
• Added a static factory method test for RustMetricsAnalyzer.analyzeFile().

Comments suppressed due to low confidence (3)

src/test/metricsAnalyzer/languages/rustAnalyzer.test.ts:57

• subtract uses an if … else … expression, and the Rust analyzer counts the else_clause as +1 as well. The expected complexity of this function should be 2 (if + else), not 1.

      assert.strictEqual(results.length, 2);
      assert.strictEqual(results[0].name, "add");
      assert.strictEqual(results[0].complexity, 0);
      assert.strictEqual(results[1].name, "subtract");
      assert.strictEqual(results[1].complexity, 1);
    });

src/test/metricsAnalyzer/languages/rustAnalyzer.test.ts:161

• This if / else if / else chain should include an else clause increment as well. The Rust analyzer reports reasons ["if expression", "else if clause", "else clause"] with total complexity 3 for this pattern, so expecting 2 here will fail.

      // if(1) + else if(1) = 2
      const results = analyzer.analyzeFunctions(sourceCode);
      assert.strictEqual(results[0].complexity, 2);
      const reasons = results[0].details.map((d) => d.reason);
      assert.ok(reasons.includes("if expression"));
      assert.ok(reasons.includes("else if clause"));
    });

src/test/metricsAnalyzer/languages/rustAnalyzer.test.ts:288

• This test claims to verify nested-closure counting, but the closure (|x| x * 2) is after the if block, so it’s at nesting level 0 and should not add complexity. As written, the assertion can pass even if nested closures are never counted; restructure the sample so the closure is actually inside a nested context (e.g., within the if body) and assert a closure (nested) detail/increment.

    test("should count nested closure", () => {
      const sourceCode = `
fn process(items: &[i32]) -> i32 {
    if items.is_empty() {
        return 0;
    }
    items.iter().map(|x| x * 2).sum()
}
`;
      // if(1) + closure nested inside if context → complexity >= 1
      const results = analyzer.analyzeFunctions(sourceCode);
      assert.ok(results[0].complexity >= 1);
    });

[codecov]

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 76.23%. Comparing base (6e2ba04) to head (fd38346).

Additional details and impacted files

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main     #328   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   76.23%   76.23%           
=======================================
  Files          13       13           
  Lines        3981     3981           
  Branches      428      428           
=======================================
  Hits         3035     3035           
  Misses        944      944           
  Partials        2        2           

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

• ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.
• 📦 JS Bundle Analysis: Save yourself from yourself by tracking and limiting bundle sizes in JS merges.