new 'gatecost' heuristic implemented

[AlexPloier]

for tcad journal final version, so the code is up-to-date w. the paper

[burgholzer]

Please resolve the conflicts reported by git and check that CI passes on your changes. Otherwise, I can't give this a proper review.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 92.72727% with 4 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 87.6%. Comparing base (357fb74) to head (7f83797).
Report is 345 commits behind head on main.

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
src/PathSimulator.cpp	91.8%	3 Missing ⚠️
include/PathSimulator.hpp	94.4%	1 Missing ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##            main    #105     +/-   ##
=======================================
+ Coverage   87.4%   87.6%   +0.1%     
=======================================
  Files         20      20             
  Lines       2036    2083     +47     
  Branches     358     367      +9     
=======================================
+ Hits        1781    1826     +45     
- Misses       255     257      +2     

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

[burgholzer]

Please consider extending the C++ tests to cover your changes and assert that everything works properly.

[burgholzer]

Many thanks for the pull request.
I just quickly managed to go through all the changes and I believe there is still some work left to be done before this can be merged.
You can find detailed comments below. Perhaps the main points can be summarized as follows:

• consider improving the handling of the gate_cost heuristic as I believe the current way it is implemented limits its performance to some degree (probably the most critical out of the requests for changes)
• please remove any leftovers from development or debugging that are no longer needed
• please do not write test for the sake of improving the number reported by codecov, but for actually testing the functionality of your changes/new features
• please avoid to duplicate code and refactor appropriately to extract common functionality

[burgholzer]

These changes look mostly good to me and should be safe to merge. We can revisit later anyway if something pops up. Just one point where I am not quite sure where that change is coming from. Maybe you have the answer to that.