Apply formatting fixes

Author: avoidwork

benchmarks/README.md

@@ -16,6 +16,7 @@ This directory contains modern benchmark implementations for the tiny-lru librar
   - Realistic workload scenarios without measuring setup/teardown
 
 **Test Categories**:
+
 - SET operations (empty cache, full cache, eviction scenarios)
 - GET operations (hit/miss patterns, access patterns)
 - Mixed operations (real-world 80/20 read-write scenarios)
@@ -26,7 +27,7 @@ This directory contains modern benchmark implementations for the tiny-lru librar
 
 **Comprehensive comparison against other popular LRU cache libraries**
 
-- **Libraries Tested**: 
+- **Libraries Tested**:
   - `tiny-lru` (this library)
   - `lru-cache` (most popular npm LRU implementation)
   - `quick-lru` (fast, lightweight alternative)
@@ -39,6 +40,7 @@ This directory contains modern benchmark implementations for the tiny-lru librar
   - Multiple operations per measured callback to reduce harness overhead
 
 **Test Categories**:
+
 - SET operations across all libraries
 - GET operations with pre-populated caches
 - DELETE operations comparison
@@ -59,6 +61,7 @@ This directory contains modern benchmark implementations for the tiny-lru librar
   - Deterministic mixed workloads (no `Math.random()` in measured loops)
 
 **Test Categories**:
+
 - Performance Observer based function timing
 - Custom timer with statistical analysis
 - Scalability tests (100 to 10,000 cache sizes)
@@ -111,6 +114,7 @@ node benchmarks/comparison-benchmark.js
 ## Understanding the Results
 
 ### Tinybench Output
+
 ```
 ┌─────────┬─────────────────────────────┬─────────────────┬────────────────────┬──────────┬─────────┐
 │ (index) │          Task Name          │     ops/sec     │ Average Time (ns)  │  Margin  │ Samples │
@@ -124,6 +128,7 @@ node benchmarks/comparison-benchmark.js
 - **Samples**: Number of samples collected for statistical significance
 
 ### Performance Observer Output
+
 ```
 ┌─────────────┬─────────┬────────────┬────────────┬────────────┬───────────────┬─────────┬────────┐
 │   Function  │  Calls  │  Avg (ms)  │  Min (ms)  │  Max (ms)  │  Median (ms)  │ Std Dev │Ops/sec │
@@ -132,6 +137,7 @@ node benchmarks/comparison-benchmark.js
 ```
 
 ### Comparison Benchmark Output
+
 ```
 📊 SET Operations Benchmark
 ┌─────────┬─────────────────────────────┬─────────────────┬────────────────────┬──────────┬─────────┐
@@ -155,71 +161,88 @@ Memory Usage Results:
 ## Benchmark Categories Explained
 
 ### SET Operations
+
 Tests cache write performance under various conditions:
+
 - **Empty cache**: Setting items in a fresh cache
 - **Full cache**: Setting items when cache is at capacity (triggers eviction)
 - **Random vs Sequential**: Different access patterns
-  
+
 Implementation details:
+
 - Deterministic keys/values are pre-generated once per run
 - Access indices are precomputed via a fast PRNG (xorshift) to avoid runtime randomness
 - Multiple operations are executed per benchmark callback to minimize harness overhead
 
-### GET Operations  
+### GET Operations
+
 Tests cache read performance:
+
 - **Cache hits**: Reading existing items
 - **Cache misses**: Reading non-existent items
 - **Mixed patterns**: Realistic 80% hit / 20% miss scenarios
-  
+
 Implementation details:
+
 - Caches are pre-populated outside the measured section
 - Access indices are precomputed; no `Math.random()` inside measured loops
 
 ### Mixed Operations
+
 Real-world usage simulation:
+
 - **80/20 read-write**: Typical web application pattern
 - **Cache warming**: Sequential population scenarios
 - **High churn**: Frequent eviction scenarios
 - **LRU access patterns**: Testing LRU algorithm efficiency
-  
+
 Implementation details:
+
 - Choice and index streams are precomputed
 - No wall-clock calls (`Date.now`) inside hot paths
 
 ### Special Operations
+
 Edge cases and additional functionality:
+
 - **Delete operations**: Individual item removal
 - **Clear operations**: Complete cache clearing
 - **Different data types**: Numbers, objects, strings
 - **Memory usage**: Heap consumption analysis
-  
+
 Implementation details:
+
 - Delete benchmarks maintain a steady state by re-adding deleted keys to keep cardinality stable
 
 ## Best Practices Implemented
 
 ### 1. Statistical Significance
+
 - Minimum execution time (1 second) for reliable results
 - Multiple iterations for statistical validity
 - Standard deviation and margin of error reporting
 
 ### 2. Realistic Test Data
+
 - Variable key/value sizes mimicking real applications
 - Deterministic pseudo-random and sequential access patterns (precomputed)
 - Pre-population scenarios for realistic cache states
 
 ### 3. Multiple Measurement Approaches
+
 - **Tinybench**: Modern, accurate micro-benchmarking
 - **Performance Observer**: Native Node.js function timing
 - **Custom timers**: High-resolution manual timing
 
 ### 4. Comprehensive Coverage
+
 - Different cache sizes (100, 1K, 5K, 10K)
 - Various workload patterns
 - Memory consumption analysis
 - Edge case testing
 
 ### 5. Methodology Improvements (Current)
+
 - Setup/teardown moved outside measured sections to avoid skewing results
 - Deterministic data and access patterns (no randomness in hot paths)
 - Batched operations per invocation reduce harness overhead reliably across tasks
@@ -228,27 +251,31 @@ Implementation details:
 ## Performance Tips
 
 ### For accurate results:
+
 1. **Close other applications** to reduce system noise
 2. **Run multiple times** and compare results
 3. **Use consistent hardware** for comparisons
 4. **Enable garbage collection** with `--expose-gc` for memory tests
 5. **Consider CPU frequency scaling** on laptops
 
 ### Environment information included:
+
 - Node.js version
-- Platform and architecture  
+- Platform and architecture
 - Timestamp for result tracking
 
 ## Interpreting Results
 
 ### Good Performance Indicators:
+
 - ✅ **Consistent ops/sec** across runs
 - ✅ **Low margin of error** (< 5%)
 - ✅ **Reasonable standard deviation**
 - ✅ **GET operations faster than SET**
 - ✅ **Cache hits faster than misses**
 
 ### Warning Signs:
+
 - ⚠️ **High margin of error** (> 10%)
 - ⚠️ **Widely varying results** between runs
 - ⚠️ **Memory usage growing unexpectedly**
@@ -260,16 +287,17 @@ To add new benchmark scenarios:
 
 ```javascript
 // In modern-benchmark.js
-bench.add('your-test-name', () => {
+bench.add("your-test-name", () => {
   // Your test code here
   const cache = lru(1000);
-  cache.set('key', 'value');
+  cache.set("key", "value");
 });
 ```
 
 ## Contributing
 
 When adding new benchmarks:
+
 1. Follow the existing naming conventions
 2. Include proper setup/teardown
 3. Add statistical significance checks
@@ -279,6 +307,7 @@ When adding new benchmarks:
 ## Benchmark Results Archive
 
 Consider saving benchmark results with:
+
 ```bash
 # Save all benchmark results
 npm run benchmark:all > results/benchmark-$(date +%Y%m%d-%H%M%S).txt
@@ -296,19 +325,22 @@ This helps track performance improvements/regressions over time.
 Choose the right benchmark for your needs:
 
 ### Use `modern-benchmark.js` when:
+
 - ✅ You want comprehensive analysis of tiny-lru performance
 - ✅ You need statistical significance and margin of error data
 - ✅ You're testing different cache sizes and workload patterns
 - ✅ You want realistic scenario testing
 
 ### Use `comparison-benchmark.js` when:
+
 - ✅ You're evaluating tiny-lru against other LRU libraries
 - ✅ You need bundle size and memory usage comparisons
 - ✅ You want to see competitive performance analysis
 - ✅ You're making library selection decisions
 
 ### Use `performance-observer-benchmark.js` when:
+
 - ✅ You need native Node.js performance measurement
 - ✅ You want function-level timing analysis
 - ✅ You're testing scalability across different cache sizes
-- ✅ You prefer Performance API over external libraries 
+- ✅ You prefer Performance API over external libraries