[pre-commit.ci] pre-commit autoupdate

[pre-commit-ci]

updates:

• github.com/astral-sh/ruff-pre-commit: v0.14.0 → v0.14.1

[codecov]

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 82.59%. Comparing base (61fcf80) to head (efe364b).

Additional details and impacted files

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##           master     #567   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   82.59%   82.59%           
=======================================
  Files           9        9           
  Lines        2602     2602           
=======================================
  Hits         2149     2149           
  Misses        453      453           

☔ 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.

[codspeed-hq]

CodSpeed Performance Report

Merging #567 will improve performances by 62.07%

_{Comparing pre-commit-ci-update-config (efe364b) with master (61fcf80)}

⚠️ 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.

Summary

⚡ 9 improvements
✅ 97 untouched
⏩ 106 skipped¹

Benchmarks breakdown

	Mode	Benchmark	BASE	HEAD	Change
⚡	WallTime	test_benchmark_rust	85 µs	64.7 µs	+31.51%
⚡	WallTime	test_benchmark_rust	112.4 µs	90.7 µs	+23.98%
⚡	WallTime	test_benchmark_rust	112.4 µs	90.8 µs	+23.71%
⚡	WallTime	test_benchmark_rust	17.9 µs	11.6 µs	+53.69%
⚡	WallTime	test_benchmark_rust	18.7 µs	11.6 µs	+62.07%
⚡	WallTime	test_benchmark_rust	18.8 µs	11.6 µs	+61.76%
⚡	WallTime	test_benchmark_rust	18.2 µs	11.8 µs	+54.94%
⚡	WallTime	test_benchmark_rust	20.1 µs	12.7 µs	+59.03%
⚡	WallTime	test_benchmark_rust	19.5 µs	12.2 µs	+60.29%

Footnotes

1. 106 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. ↩