Rename the precondition helpers to short_circuit - #9406
Performance Regression: -0.95%
⚠️ Unknown Walltime execution environment detected
Using the Walltime instrument on standard Hosted Runners will lead to inconsistent data.
For the most accurate results, we recommend using CodSpeed Macro Runners: bare-metal machines fine-tuned for performance measurement consistency.
⚠️ Different runtime environments detected
Some benchmarks with significant performance changes were compared across different runtime environments,
which may affect the accuracy of the results.
⚡ 2 improved benchmarks
❌ 2 regressed benchmarks
✅ 1990 untouched benchmarks
⏩ 89 skipped benchmarks1
Warning
Please fix the performance issues or acknowledge them on CodSpeed.
Performance Changes
| Mode | Benchmark | BASE |
HEAD |
Efficiency | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ❌ | WallTime | words_gather_scalar[65536] |
8.3 µs | 9.4 µs | -12.1% |
| ❌ | Simulation | compress_fsst[(1000, 64, 8)] |
1 ms | 1.2 ms | -11.15% |
| ⚡ | Simulation | search_index_in_range_chunked |
5.8 ms | 5.2 ms | +12.06% |
| ⚡ | WallTime | words_gather_dispatch[1024] |
33 ns | 30 ns | +10% |
Tip
Investigate this regression by commenting @codspeedbot fix this regression on this PR, or directly use the CodSpeed MCP with your agent.
Comparing ct/rename-precondition-short-circuit (9363149) with develop (1a493b6)2
Footnotes
-
89 benchmarks were skipped, so the baseline results were used instead. If they were deleted from the codebase, click here and archive them to remove them from the performance reports. ↩
-
No successful run was found on
ct/remove-to-compare-operator(41a7eaa) during the generation of this report, sodevelop(1a493b6) was used instead as the comparison base. There might be some changes unrelated to this pull request in this report. ↩