Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Add lexer benchmark #7132

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Sep 4, 2023
Merged

Add lexer benchmark #7132

merged 2 commits into from
Sep 4, 2023

Conversation

dhruvmanila
Copy link
Member

Summary

This PR adds a separate lexer benchmark. The parser benchmark might not be
sufficient to detect any regressions in the lexer performance.

Test Plan

cargo bench -p ruff_benchmark --bench lexer

@dhruvmanila
Copy link
Member Author

Current dependencies on/for this PR:

This comment was auto-generated by Graphite.

Copy link
Member

@MichaReiser MichaReiser left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thank you

@dhruvmanila dhruvmanila enabled auto-merge (squash) September 4, 2023 13:11
@dhruvmanila dhruvmanila merged commit 154fe7b into main Sep 4, 2023
@dhruvmanila dhruvmanila deleted the dhruv/lexer-benchmark branch September 4, 2023 13:18
@codspeed-hq
Copy link

codspeed-hq bot commented Sep 4, 2023

CodSpeed Performance Report

Merging #7132 will degrade performances by 2.49%

Comparing dhruv/lexer-benchmark (39c91ef) with main (ece30e7)

Summary

❌ 1 regressions
✅ 19 untouched benchmarks

🆕 5 new benchmarks

⚠️ Please fix the performance issues or acknowledge them on CodSpeed.

Benchmarks breakdown

Benchmark main dhruv/lexer-benchmark Change
🆕 lexer[unicode/pypinyin.py] N/A 700.4 µs N/A
🆕 lexer[numpy/globals.py] N/A 257.7 µs N/A
🆕 lexer[numpy/ctypeslib.py] N/A 2.3 ms N/A
🆕 lexer[pydantic/types.py] N/A 4.8 ms N/A
linter/all-rules[numpy/ctypeslib.py] 32.9 ms 33.8 ms -2.49%
🆕 lexer[large/dataset.py] N/A 11.6 ms N/A

@github-actions
Copy link
Contributor

github-actions bot commented Sep 4, 2023

PR Check Results

Ecosystem

✅ ecosystem check detected no changes.

@dhruvmanila dhruvmanila added the internal An internal refactor or improvement label Sep 6, 2023
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
internal An internal refactor or improvement
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants