Repository navigation
docs: use neutral wording for historical performance examples - #728
Conversation
![graphify-labs[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/4356270?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Graphify reviewed this change.
No issues found by static checks — no coupling regressions or blocking issues in the code graph. That is not the same as safe to merge: see what was not checked.
Not checked: tests were not run; no formal proof of the changed code.
Graphify review — findings
Anonymizes two performance figures in the changelog by replacing the named "hungpixi (24,238 closed trades)" benchmark with generic "one measured example" and "the same example" wording. The timings (74.18 s, 1800 s, 107.2 s) and the explanation of the report-sink slowdown stay the same, so only the attribution to a specific third-party script is removed.
No blocking issues surfaced.
Analysis details — impact, health, verification
Impact & health
Graphify review
Impact — 75 functions depend on the 75 functions this change touches.
Health — grade A; no new coupling hotspots.
Verification — 75 functions in the blast radius were not formally verified this run (proofs are advisory here).
Gate & verification
graphify gate
PASS — objectively clean (no health regressions, tests not run — proofs not run this pass (advisory)). Grounded, not self-assessed.
Advisory (not blocking):
- verification_scope: 75 function(s) in the blast radius were not formally verified this run
Reword the historical changelog example using neutral references, preserving its report-sink and cache conditions and recorded timings while removing the script name and example trade count.
This change updates documentation wording only.
🤖 Generated with Claude Code