chore: update dependencies

[wellwelwel]

• 🤖 Update project dependencies

[wellwelwel-bot]

🎖️ Benchmarks

🏃🏻‍♀️ 1/4 Execution Tests

Note

Focuses solely in execution, using a simple assert(true) or assert(false) from Node.js and searches for files in four levels of depth.

• success: a suite of 5 tests that will pass.
• failure: a suite of 5 tests that will fail.
• balanced: a suite of 10 tests where 5 tests will fail and 5 tests will pass.

See Results

---

🃏 Jest

• success

  🐷 Poku (aef97d7) ran
    5.32 ± 0.16 times faster than jest

See commands

source	node --experimental-vm-modules ./node_modules/jest/bin/jest.js "./test/execution/success/jest"
poku	node ./node_modules/poku/lib/bin/index.js "./test/execution/success/poku"

• failure

  🐷 Poku (aef97d7) ran
    5.25 ± 0.18 times faster than jest

See commands

source	node --experimental-vm-modules ./node_modules/jest/bin/jest.js "./test/execution/failure/jest"
poku	node ./node_modules/poku/lib/bin/index.js "./test/execution/failure/poku"

• balanced

  🐷 Poku (aef97d7) ran
    4.42 ± 0.13 times faster than jest

See commands

source	node --experimental-vm-modules ./node_modules/jest/bin/jest.js "./test/execution/balanced/jest"
poku	node ./node_modules/poku/lib/bin/index.js "./test/execution/balanced/poku"

---

⚡️ Vitest

• success

  🐷 Poku (aef97d7) ran
    4.58 ± 0.17 times faster than vitest

See commands

source	node ./node_modules/vitest/vitest.mjs run "./test/execution/success/vitest"
poku	node ./node_modules/poku/lib/bin/index.js "./test/execution/success/poku"

• failure

  🐷 Poku (aef97d7) ran
    4.70 ± 0.16 times faster than vitest

See commands

source	node ./node_modules/vitest/vitest.mjs run "./test/execution/failure/vitest"
poku	node ./node_modules/poku/lib/bin/index.js "./test/execution/failure/poku"

• balanced

  🐷 Poku (aef97d7) ran
    4.57 ± 0.15 times faster than vitest

See commands

source	node ./node_modules/vitest/vitest.mjs run "./test/execution/balanced/vitest"
poku	node ./node_modules/poku/lib/bin/index.js "./test/execution/balanced/poku"

---

☕️ Mocha

• success

  🐷 Poku (aef97d7) ran
    1.89 ± 0.10 times faster than mocha

See commands

source	node ./node_modules/mocha/bin/mocha.js --parallel "./test/execution/success/mocha/**"
poku	node ./node_modules/poku/lib/bin/index.js "./test/execution/success/poku"

• failure

  🐷 Poku (aef97d7) ran
    1.82 ± 0.05 times faster than mocha

See commands

source	node ./node_modules/mocha/bin/mocha.js --parallel "./test/execution/failure/mocha/**"
poku	node ./node_modules/poku/lib/bin/index.js "./test/execution/failure/poku"

• balanced

  🐷 Poku (aef97d7) ran
    1.15 ± 0.04 times faster than mocha

See commands

source	node ./node_modules/mocha/bin/mocha.js --parallel "./test/execution/balanced/mocha/**"
poku	node ./node_modules/poku/lib/bin/index.js "./test/execution/balanced/poku"

---

🐢 Node.js (built-in)

• success

  node ran
    1.13 ± 0.05 times faster than 🐷 Poku (aef97d7)

See commands

source	node --test "./test/execution/success/node/**/**.spec.js"
poku	node ./node_modules/poku/lib/bin/index.js "./test/execution/success/poku"

• failure

  node ran
    1.06 ± 0.05 times faster than 🐷 Poku (aef97d7)

See commands

source	node --test "./test/execution/failure/node/**/**.spec.js"
poku	node ./node_modules/poku/lib/bin/index.js "./test/execution/failure/poku"

• balanced

  node ran
    1.09 ± 0.04 times faster than 🐷 Poku (aef97d7)

See commands

source	node --test "./test/execution/balanced/node/**/**.spec.js"
poku	node ./node_modules/poku/lib/bin/index.js "./test/execution/balanced/poku"

---

Important

Please take into consideration that benchmarks do not indicate the competitiveness of one over the other; rather, they serve as a metric to monitor and objectively assess the current performance state of the project.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 99.95%. Comparing base (45818a0) to head (aef97d7).

Additional details and impacted files

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main     #988   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   99.95%   99.95%           
=======================================
  Files          47       47           
  Lines        2365     2365           
  Branches        1        1           
=======================================
  Hits         2364     2364           
  Partials        1        1           

Flag	Coverage Δ
linux	99.95% <ø> (ø)
osx	99.95% <ø> (ø)
windows	99.95% <ø> (ø)

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

☔ 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.