Inline formatter printing hot paths#26504
Merged
Merged
CodSpeed HQ / CodSpeed Performance Analysis
succeeded
Jul 1, 2026 in 0s
Performance Gate Passed
⚠️ Different runtime environments detected
Some benchmarks with significant performance changes were compared across different runtime environments,
which may affect the accuracy of the results.
⚡ 5 improved benchmarks
✅ 55 untouched benchmarks
⏩ 93 skipped benchmarks1
Performance Changes
| Mode | Benchmark | BASE |
HEAD |
Efficiency | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ⚡ | Simulation | formatter[pydantic/types.py] |
3.2 ms | 2.9 ms | +7.23% |
| ⚡ | Simulation | formatter[large/dataset.py] |
7.9 ms | 7.4 ms | +7.16% |
| ⚡ | Simulation | formatter[numpy/ctypeslib.py] |
1.7 ms | 1.6 ms | +5.9% |
| ⚡ | Simulation | formatter[unicode/pypinyin.py] |
612.9 µs | 580.8 µs | +5.53% |
| ⚡ | Simulation | formatter[numpy/globals.py] |
231.6 µs | 222.3 µs | +4.17% |
Tip
Curious why this is faster? Use the CodSpeed MCP and ask your agent.
Comparing charlie/codex-inline-formatter-printing (1521be2) with main (c360a05)
Footnotes
-
93 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. ↩
Loading