Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

try improving string validation #622

Closed
wants to merge 8 commits into from
Closed

try improving string validation #622

wants to merge 8 commits into from

Conversation

samuelcolvin
Copy link
Member

WIP/experiment

@codecov-commenter
Copy link

Codecov Report

Merging #622 (cc03e7c) into int-validation (6374333) will decrease coverage by 0.07%.
The diff coverage is 100.00%.

❗ Your organization is not using the GitHub App Integration. As a result you may experience degraded service beginning May 15th. Please install the Github App Integration for your organization. Read more.

Additional details and impacted files
@@                Coverage Diff                 @@
##           int-validation     #622      +/-   ##
==================================================
- Coverage           94.03%   93.96%   -0.07%     
==================================================
  Files                  98       98              
  Lines               13286    13290       +4     
  Branches               25       25              
==================================================
- Hits                12493    12488       -5     
- Misses                787      796       +9     
  Partials                6        6              
Impacted Files Coverage Δ
src/validators/typed_dict.rs 97.29% <ø> (ø)
src/input/input_python.rs 98.37% <100.00%> (-0.01%) ⬇️
src/input/return_enums.rs 89.07% <100.00%> (+0.11%) ⬆️
src/validators/arguments.rs 100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
src/validators/dataclass.rs 98.24% <100.00%> (ø)
src/validators/model_fields.rs 98.73% <100.00%> (ø)
src/validators/string.rs 94.69% <100.00%> (ø)

... and 1 file with indirect coverage changes


Continue to review full report in Codecov by Sentry.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update 6374333...cc03e7c. Read the comment docs.

@codspeed-hq
Copy link

codspeed-hq bot commented May 22, 2023

CodSpeed Performance Report

Merging #622 str-validation (cc03e7c) will not alter performances.

Summary

🔥 21 improvements
❌ 0 regressions
✅ 98 untouched benchmarks

🆕 1 new benchmarks
⁉️ 0 dropped benchmarks

Benchmarks breakdown

Benchmark int-validation str-validation Change
🔥 test_complete_core_strict 1.6 ms 1.4 ms 14.35%
🔥 test_complete_core_error 8.6 ms 7.5 ms 13.12%
🔥 test_complete_core_isinstance 8.5 ms 7.3 ms 13.98%
🔥 test_core_python_fs 392.7 µs 339.3 µs 13.61%
🔥 test_list_of_ints_core_py 8.5 ms 2.6 ms 69.10%
🔥 test_set_of_ints_core 10.5 ms 3.8 ms 63.44%
🔥 test_set_of_ints_core_duplicates 8.2 ms 2.3 ms 72.23%
🔥 test_set_of_ints_core_length 10.6 ms 3.9 ms 62.94%
🔥 test_frozenset_of_ints_core 2.4 ms 1.3 ms 45.16%
🔥 test_frozenset_of_ints_duplicates_core 1,251.2 µs 995.5 µs 20.43%
🔥 test_dict_of_ints_core 12.6 ms 6 ms 52.47%
🔥 test_many_models_core_dict 5.6 ms 4.9 ms 11.10%
🔥 test_list_of_nullable_core 1,121.4 µs 626.1 µs 44.17%
🔥 test_positional_tuple 36.9 µs 25.3 µs 31.56%
🔥 test_variable_tuple 37.4 µs 25.9 µs 30.63%
🔥 test_int_error 78.1 µs 68.4 µs 12.39%
🔥 test_definition_in_tree 28.8 ms 5.6 ms 80.65%
🔥 test_definition_out_of_tree 32.6 ms 9.4 ms 71.17%
🔥 test_model_instance 57 µs 46.8 µs 17.93%
🔥 test_model_instance_abc 60.7 µs 47.7 µs 21.39%
🔥 test_core_root_model 119.6 µs 94.4 µs 21.08%
🆕 test_strict_int N/A 15.3 µs N/A

Base automatically changed from int-validation to main May 22, 2023 12:29
@samuelcolvin
Copy link
Member Author

replaced b

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants