stdlib-js
bench: refactor to use dynamic memory allocation in 'blas/ext/base/dnansumors'
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: na
- 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: missing_dependencies
- 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
Progresses #8643.
Description
What is the purpose of this pull request?
This pull request:
- Refactors the C benchmarks for
@stdlib/blas/ext/base/dnansumorsto use dynamic memory allocation instead of static memory allocation for large arrays.
Related Issues
Does this pull request have any related issues?
This pull request has the following related issues:
- #8643
- #369
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.
- [x] Read, understood, and followed the contributing guidelines.
AI Assistance
When authoring the changes proposed in this PR, did you use any kind of AI assistance?
- [ ] Yes
- [x] No
@stdlib-js/reviewers
Coverage Report
| Package | Statements | Branches | Functions | Lines |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| blas/ext/base/dnansumors | $\color{green}380/380$ $\color{green}+100.00%$ |
$\color{green}29/29$ $\color{green}+100.00%$ |
$\color{green}4/4$ $\color{green}+100.00%$ |
$\color{green}380/380$ $\color{green}+100.00%$ |
The above coverage report was generated for the changes in this PR.
