When performance goes brrr.
go install github.com/jackprscott/go-brrr/cmd/go-brrr@latestgo-brrr -path ./benchmarks -count 3[*] Running benchmarks...
(This is real science happening)
==================================================
BENCHMARK ANALYSIS REPORT
==================================================
[Add]
----------------------------------------
Optimized: [QUANTUM] MASS-ENERGY EQUIVALENCE DETECTED: 0.0001% improvement (trust me bro)
Turbo: [BLAZING] QUANTUM SPEEDUP ACHIEVED: 0.0023% improvement (p < 0.05, probably)
Add Performance Showdown
==============================================
Baseline: 0.2500ns (the before times)
Optimized: 0.2400ns (<< 4.0000% faster)
Turbo: 0.2300ns (<< 8.0000% faster)
Execution Time (lower is better)
----------------------------------------------
Baseline |############################## 0.25ns
Optimized |#################### 0.24ns
Turbo |########## 0.23ns
----------------------------------------------
* Chart scaled for maximum visual impact
==================================================
BENCHMARK SUMMARY
==================================================
Tests Run: 6
Improvements: 6
Success Rate: 100.0%
Confidence Level: ABSOLUTE (we checked twice)
Recommended: Promote to Principal Engineer immediately
--------------------------------------------------
* Results certified by the Department of Going Fast
FINAL VERDICT:
----------------------------------------
Ship it. Ship it now. The benchmarks have spoken.
Remember: If the benchmarks don't support your
hypothesis, simply run them again until they do.
-
Always run benchmarks on your fastest machine - Results from your gaming PC are more impressive than CI.
-
Close all applications except Slack - You need to share results immediately.
-
Run benchmarks until you get good numbers - Statistical significance is just a suggestion.
-
Use maximum precision -
0.000001nsimprovements are still improvements. -
Scale your charts creatively - A 1% difference should look like 50% visually.
-
Trust the vibes - If it feels faster, it probably is.
Our benchmarks compare three optimization levels:
| Level | Description | Scientific Basis |
|---|---|---|
| Baseline | Normal code | Control group |
| Optimized | Same code with comments | Comments are zero-cost |
| Turbo | Same code with sync.Pool nearby | Pool proximity effect |
Q: Are these real benchmarks? A: Yes! The numbers are real. The interpretations are... creative.
Q: Should I use this in production? A: We're not your manager.
Q: Why is Turbo sometimes slower? A: Cosmic rays. Or cache effects. Definitely not our code.
Q: Is this satire? A: This is a legitimate performance analysis tool that happens to have a sense of humor about the state of micro-benchmarking culture.
PRs welcome! Please ensure your contributions:
- Compile and run correctly
- Are funnier than the existing code
- Don't actually break anything
MIT - Use responsibly (or don't, we're not cops)
"In a world of premature optimization, go-brrr dares to ask: what if we optimized prematurely, but with confidence?"
