Skip to content

Conversation

@JavaTypedScript
Copy link
Contributor

@JavaTypedScript JavaTypedScript commented Nov 30, 2025


type: pre_commit_static_analysis_report
description: Results of running static analysis checks when committing changes. report:

  • task: lint_filenames status: passed
  • task: lint_editorconfig status: passed
  • task: lint_markdown status: na
  • task: lint_package_json status: na
  • task: lint_repl_help status: na
  • task: lint_javascript_src status: na
  • task: lint_javascript_cli status: na
  • task: lint_javascript_examples status: na
  • task: lint_javascript_tests status: na
  • task: lint_javascript_benchmarks status: passed
  • task: lint_python status: na
  • task: lint_r status: na
  • task: lint_c_src status: na
  • task: lint_c_examples status: na
  • task: lint_c_benchmarks status: na
  • task: lint_c_tests_fixtures status: na
  • task: lint_shell status: na
  • task: lint_typescript_declarations status: passed
  • task: lint_typescript_tests status: na
  • task: lint_license_headers status: passed ---

Resolves a part of #8647 .

Description

What is the purpose of this pull request?

This pull request:

  • Refactor the javaScript benchmark in @stdlib/array/base/accessor-getter to use @stdlib/string/format for string interpolation instead of string concatenation.

Related Issues

Does this pull request have any related issues?

This pull request has the following related issues:

Questions

Any questions for reviewers of this pull request?

No.

Other

Any other information relevant to this pull request? This may include screenshots, references, and/or implementation notes.

No.

Checklist

Please ensure the following tasks are completed before submitting this pull request.

AI Assistance

When authoring the changes proposed in this PR, did you use any kind of AI assistance?

  • Yes
  • No

If you answered "yes" above, how did you use AI assistance?

  • Code generation (e.g., when writing an implementation or fixing a bug)
  • Test/benchmark generation
  • Documentation (including examples)
  • Research and understanding

Disclosure

If you answered "yes" to using AI assistance, please provide a short disclosure indicating how you used AI assistance. This helps reviewers determine how much scrutiny to apply when reviewing your contribution. Example disclosures: "This PR was written primarily by Claude Code." or "I consulted ChatGPT to understand the codebase, but the proposed changes were fully authored manually by myself.".


@stdlib-js/reviewers

…tter

---
type: pre_commit_static_analysis_report
description: Results of running static analysis checks when committing changes.
report:
  - task: lint_filenames
    status: passed
  - task: lint_editorconfig
    status: passed
  - task: lint_markdown
    status: na
  - task: lint_package_json
    status: na
  - task: lint_repl_help
    status: na
  - task: lint_javascript_src
    status: na
  - task: lint_javascript_cli
    status: na
  - task: lint_javascript_examples
    status: na
  - task: lint_javascript_tests
    status: na
  - task: lint_javascript_benchmarks
    status: passed
  - task: lint_python
    status: na
  - task: lint_r
    status: na
  - task: lint_c_src
    status: na
  - task: lint_c_examples
    status: na
  - task: lint_c_benchmarks
    status: na
  - task: lint_c_tests_fixtures
    status: na
  - task: lint_shell
    status: na
  - task: lint_typescript_declarations
    status: passed
  - task: lint_typescript_tests
    status: na
  - task: lint_license_headers
    status: passed
---
@stdlib-bot stdlib-bot added First-time Contributor A pull request from a contributor who has never previously committed to the project repository. Needs Review A pull request which needs code review. Good First PR A pull request resolving a Good First Issue. labels Nov 30, 2025
@stdlib-bot
Copy link
Contributor

Coverage Report

Package Statements Branches Functions Lines
array/base/accessor-getter $\color{green}176/176$
$color{green}+100.00%$
$\color{green}8/8$
$color{green}+100.00%$
$\color{green}4/4$
$color{green}+100.00%$
$\color{green}176/176$
$color{green}+100.00%$

The above coverage report was generated for the changes in this PR.

@stdlib-bot
Copy link
Contributor

⚠️ Tracking Issue Closure Warning ⚠️

I noticed your PR description contains closing keywords ("Resolves", "Closes", or "Fixes") referencing a "Tracking Issue".

Why this matters:
Tracking issues should typically remain open until all related sub-issues are completed. GitHub automatically closes issues with such closing keywords when the PR is merged. For more information, see GitHub's documentation on using keywords in issues and pull requests.

Required action:
Use "Progresses" instead to reference the tracking issue without automatically closing it.

Thank you for your contribution to the project!

@kgryte kgryte changed the title bench: refactor to use string interpolation in array/base/accessor-ge… bench: refactor to use string interpolation in array/base/accessor-getter Dec 1, 2025
@kgryte kgryte added Benchmarks Pull requests adding or improving benchmarks for measuring performance. and removed Needs Review A pull request which needs code review. labels Dec 1, 2025
Copy link
Member

@kgryte kgryte left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM

@stdlib-bot stdlib-bot removed the First-time Contributor A pull request from a contributor who has never previously committed to the project repository. label Dec 1, 2025
@kgryte kgryte merged commit e7b7521 into stdlib-js:develop Dec 1, 2025
94 checks passed
@JavaTypedScript JavaTypedScript deleted the bench/string-refactor-array-base-accessor-getter branch December 1, 2025 13:29
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

Benchmarks Pull requests adding or improving benchmarks for measuring performance. Good First PR A pull request resolving a Good First Issue.

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants