AI-generated possible solution for #2528 (A)

[hugnia]

Hi,

We're a research team at JetBrains studying how maintainers evaluate AI-generated code.

We opened two pull requests as possible solutions to the corresponding issue, each taking a different approach. Both were generated by AI and have not yet been manually reviewed by a human. We’d like to get your perspective on these two solutions via a 10-minute survey. Regardless of your role, we want to know which solution actually saves you work, and which qualities of AI-generated code matter most when working with the codebase.

If you're open to participating in our study, just reply "I'm interested" here, and we'll send the details to the contact specified in your GitHub profile. If you'd rather not take part, feel free to close the PRs – we won’t post them again.

Thanks!

Issue #2528

[codecov]

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 99.16%. Comparing base (ab9cd36) to head (05142d1).
⚠️ Report is 29 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main    #2548   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   99.15%   99.16%           
=======================================
  Files          41       41           
  Lines        3090     3096    +6     
  Branches      668      670    +2     
=======================================
+ Hits         3064     3070    +6     
  Misses         14       14           
  Partials       12       12           

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

• ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.

[DanielNoord]

Did you validate the tests fail without the chanege?

[hugnia]

Hi @DanielNoord
Thank you so much for taking the time to look into that!

No, we did not validate the code in hopes of getting your feedback on its raw form. Our intent with this PR is not, per se, to merge the code, but rather to get your view on the suggestions and their usefulness. From your feedback, if I understood correctly, the tests are crucial in deciding on whether the PR is even worth looking into, and I totally get that.

If you'd consider participating in the survey regarding suggestions, we would be grateful, but feel free to close and ignore the PR if it is not something you're interested in.

[DanielNoord]

Please stop doing this.

I’m really trying to reply to all PRs and issues we get, but with this AI slop it is hard to keep doing so.
It also reflects very poorly on your employer.