Feat/adversarial tests by jcfangc · Pull Request #16 · jcfangc/bit-string

Performance Regression: -12.44%

❌ 9 regressed benchmarks
✅ 162 untouched benchmarks
⏩ 11 skipped benchmarks¹

Warning

Please fix the performance issues or acknowledge them on CodSpeed.

	Benchmark	`BASE`	`HEAD`	Efficiency
❌	`ends_with/len_65/no/bit_string`	343.9 ns	402.2 ns	-14.5%
❌	`ends_with/len_65/yes/bit_string`	343.9 ns	402.2 ns	-14.5%
❌	`matches_at/len_65/no/aligned/bit_string`	401.7 ns	460 ns	-12.68%
❌	`matches_at/len_65/yes/aligned/bit_string`	401.7 ns	460 ns	-12.68%
❌	`matches_at/len_65/no/unaligned/bit_string`	405 ns	463.3 ns	-12.59%
❌	`matches_at/len_65/yes/unaligned/bit_string`	405 ns	463.3 ns	-12.59%
❌	`count_ones/len_65/alternating/bit_string`	248.6 ns	278.6 ns	-10.77%
❌	`count_ones/len_65/dense/bit_string`	248.6 ns	278.6 ns	-10.77%
❌	`count_ones/len_65/sparse/bit_string`	248.6 ns	278.6 ns	-10.77%

Tip

Investigate this regression by commenting @codspeedbot fix this regression on this PR, or directly use the CodSpeed MCP with your agent.

_{Comparing feat/adversarial-tests (ed298b7) with main (cd6871e)}

11 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. ↩