ci: make PMD a zero-findings gate by shai-almog · Pull Request #6119 · codenameone/CodenameOne

shai-almog · 2026-10-27T12:37:31Z

The PMD gate in generate-quality-report.py failed only on a hand-kept list of forbidden rules. A rule missing from that list, AvoidUsingHardCodedIP in OtlpTestCollector (from #6114), reached master even though the report showed it with ❌.

Any PMD finding now fails the build, the same as SpotBugs. Intentional exceptions use //NOPMD <Rule> - <reason>.
The one existing finding gets that comment: the test collector binds to loopback only.
CLAUDE.md is updated to match.

🤖 Generated with Claude Code

The PMD gate failed only on a fixed list of rules, so an unlisted one (AvoidUsingHardCodedIP in OtlpTestCollector, from #6114) reached master while the report showed it in red. Any PMD finding now fails the build, matching SpotBugs; the one finding gets a NOPMD with its reason. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>

ClassNamingConventions (Action_1, Int32_, TMP_Text: names the translator binds to), AbstractClassWithoutAnyMethod (abstract in C#) and ExtendsObject (UnityEngine.Object, which PMD mistakes for java.lang.Object). Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>

shai-almog · 2026-10-27T13:22:48Z

Compared 227 screenshots: 227 matched.
✅ JavaScript-port screenshot tests passed.

shai-almog · 2026-10-27T13:27:04Z

Compared 206 screenshots: 206 matched.
Native Windows port, REAL shipping pipeline: the hellocodenameone screenshot suite rendered by a binary CROSS-COMPILED on Linux (clang-cl + xwin, WebView2 linked) and RUN on a Windows x64 runner. Compared against the in-repo baseline in scripts/windows/screenshots.

Benchmark Results

Detailed Performance Metrics

Metric	Duration
SIMD kernel backend	SSE2 (x64) / NEON (arm64) native kernels
SIMD int-add (64K x300)	java 43ms / native 2ms = 21.5x speedup
SIMD float-mul (64K x300)	java 44ms / native 3ms = 14.6x speedup
SIMD kernel correctness	PASS (native result == scalar reference)
Base64 native bridge	unavailable (CN1 + SIMD + image benchmarks only)
Base64 payload size	8192 bytes
Base64 benchmark iterations	6000
Base64 SIMD byte path	gated to scalar (CPU autovectorizes scalar; explicit SIMD not beneficial here)
Base64 CN1 encode	61.000 ms
Base64 CN1 decode	73.000 ms
Base64 SIMD encode	92.000 ms
Base64 encode ratio (SIMD/CN1)	1.508x (50.8% slower)
Base64 SIMD decode	76.000 ms
Base64 decode ratio (SIMD/CN1)	1.041x (4.1% slower)
Image encode benchmark iterations	100
Image createMask (SIMD off)	7.000 ms
Image createMask (SIMD on)	3.000 ms
Image createMask ratio (SIMD on/off)	0.429x (57.1% faster)
Image applyMask (SIMD off)	23.000 ms
Image applyMask (SIMD on)	26.000 ms
Image applyMask ratio (SIMD on/off)	1.130x (13.0% slower)
Image modifyAlpha (SIMD off)	25.000 ms
Image modifyAlpha (SIMD on)	17.000 ms
Image modifyAlpha ratio (SIMD on/off)	0.680x (32.0% faster)
Image modifyAlpha removeColor (SIMD off)	22.000 ms
Image modifyAlpha removeColor (SIMD on)	12.000 ms
Image modifyAlpha removeColor ratio (SIMD on/off)	0.545x (45.5% faster)

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>

shai-almog · 2026-10-27T14:05:22Z

Compared 191 screenshots: 191 matched.

Native Android coverage

📊 Line coverage: 18.90% (48250/255341 lines covered) [HTML preview] (artifact android-coverage-report, jacocoAndroidReport/html/index.html)
- Other counters: instruction 17.64% (229182/1299035), branch 12.04% (16817/139675), complexity 9.67% (12910/133466), method 14.57% (9122/62628), class 25.16% (1774/7052)
- Lowest covered classes
  - kotlin.collections.kotlin.collections.ArraysKt___ArraysKt – 0.00% (0/6367 lines covered)
  - kotlin.collections.unsigned.kotlin.collections.unsigned.UArraysKt___UArraysKt – 0.00% (0/2384 lines covered)
  - org.jacoco.agent.rt.internal_0e20598.asm.org.jacoco.agent.rt.internal_0e20598.asm.ClassReader – 0.00% (0/1524 lines covered)
  - org.jacoco.agent.rt.internal_0e20598.asm.org.jacoco.agent.rt.internal_0e20598.asm.MethodWriter – 0.00% (0/922 lines covered)
  - kotlin.sequences.kotlin.sequences.SequencesKt___SequencesKt – 0.00% (0/736 lines covered)
  - com.google.common.cache.com.google.common.cache.LocalCache$Segment – 0.00% (0/726 lines covered)
  - okio.okio.Buffer – 0.00% (0/687 lines covered)
  - kotlin.text.kotlin.text.StringsKt___StringsKt – 0.00% (0/625 lines covered)
  - com.codename1.androidcompat.rt.com.codename1.androidcompat.rt.TextXmlPullParser – 0.00% (0/623 lines covered)
  - com.codename1.androidcompat.androidx.constraintlayout.core.widgets.com.codename1.androidcompat.androidx.constraintlayout.core.widgets.Flow – 0.00% (0/576 lines covered)

✅ Native Android screenshot tests passed.

Native Android coverage

📊 Line coverage: 18.90% (48250/255341 lines covered) [HTML preview] (artifact android-coverage-report, jacocoAndroidReport/html/index.html)
- Other counters: instruction 17.64% (229182/1299035), branch 12.04% (16817/139675), complexity 9.67% (12910/133466), method 14.57% (9122/62628), class 25.16% (1774/7052)
- Lowest covered classes
  - kotlin.collections.kotlin.collections.ArraysKt___ArraysKt – 0.00% (0/6367 lines covered)
  - kotlin.collections.unsigned.kotlin.collections.unsigned.UArraysKt___UArraysKt – 0.00% (0/2384 lines covered)
  - org.jacoco.agent.rt.internal_0e20598.asm.org.jacoco.agent.rt.internal_0e20598.asm.ClassReader – 0.00% (0/1524 lines covered)
  - org.jacoco.agent.rt.internal_0e20598.asm.org.jacoco.agent.rt.internal_0e20598.asm.MethodWriter – 0.00% (0/922 lines covered)
  - kotlin.sequences.kotlin.sequences.SequencesKt___SequencesKt – 0.00% (0/736 lines covered)
  - com.google.common.cache.com.google.common.cache.LocalCache$Segment – 0.00% (0/726 lines covered)
  - okio.okio.Buffer – 0.00% (0/687 lines covered)
  - kotlin.text.kotlin.text.StringsKt___StringsKt – 0.00% (0/625 lines covered)
  - com.codename1.androidcompat.rt.com.codename1.androidcompat.rt.TextXmlPullParser – 0.00% (0/623 lines covered)
  - com.codename1.androidcompat.androidx.constraintlayout.core.widgets.com.codename1.androidcompat.androidx.constraintlayout.core.widgets.Flow – 0.00% (0/576 lines covered)

Benchmark Results

Detailed Performance Metrics

Metric	Duration
SIMD kernel backend	scalar fallback (no native SIMD)
SIMD int-add (64K x300)	java 209ms / native 95ms = 2.2x speedup
SIMD float-mul (64K x300)	java 162ms / native 75ms = 2.1x speedup
SIMD kernel correctness	PASS (native result == scalar reference)
Base64 payload size	8192 bytes
Base64 benchmark iterations	6000
Base64 SIMD byte path	gated to scalar (CPU autovectorizes scalar; explicit SIMD not beneficial here)
Base64 CN1 encode	94.000 ms
Base64 CN1 decode	83.000 ms
Base64 native encode	389.000 ms
Base64 encode ratio (CN1/native)	0.242x (75.8% faster)
Base64 native decode	264.000 ms
Base64 decode ratio (CN1/native)	0.314x (68.6% faster)
Image encode benchmark status	skipped (SIMD unsupported)

github-actions · 2026-10-27T14:23:51Z

✅ Continuous Quality Report

Test & Coverage

✅ Tests: 14622 total, 0 failed, 161 skipped
📊 Line coverage: 64.97% [HTML preview] [Download]
- Lowest covered classes
  - com.codename1.io.zip.ZipArchiveOutputStream – 0.00%
  - com.codename1.gaming.level.GameSceneView – 0.00%
  - com.codename1.crash.CrashProtection – 0.00%
  - com.codename1.mapping.JsonValues – 0.00%
  - com.codename1.payment.CommerceManager – 0.00%
  - com.codename1.wearable.WearableMessage – 0.00%
  - com.codename1.ui.plaf.GlassLensBlend – 0.00%
  - com.codename1.vr.VRView – 0.00%
  - com.codename1.appreview.RatingDialog – 0.00%
  - com.codename1.db.ManagedKeys – 0.00%

Static Analysis

SpotBugs [Report archive]
- ✅ ByteCodeTranslator: 0 findings (no issues)
- ✅ android: 0 findings (no issues)
- ✅ android-compat: 0 findings (no issues)
- ✅ android-res-compiler: 0 findings (no issues)
- ✅ backend: 0 findings (no issues)
- ✅ backend-test: 0 findings (no issues)
- ✅ build-engine: 0 findings (no issues)
- ✅ build-hint-catalog: 0 findings (no issues)
- ✅ build-hint-tools: 0 findings (no issues)
- ✅ codenameone-gradle-plugin: 0 findings (no issues)
- ✅ codenameone-maven-plugin: 0 findings (no issues)
- ✅ core-unittests: 0 findings (no issues)
- ✅ desktop-compat-runtime: 0 findings (no issues)
- ✅ fxml-compiler: 0 findings (no issues)
- ✅ ios: 0 findings (no issues)
- ✅ javac: 0 findings (no issues)
- ✅ javafx-compat: 0 findings (no issues)
- ✅ project-model: 0 findings (no issues)
- ✅ swing-compat: 0 findings (no issues)
✅ PMD: 0 findings (no issues) [Report archive]
✅ Checkstyle: 0 findings (no issues) [Report archive]

Generated automatically by the PR CI workflow.

shai-almog · 2026-10-27T14:34:51Z

Compared 206 screenshots: 206 matched.
Native Windows port (x64 / Intel-AMD): full hellocodenameone screenshot suite rendered offscreen with Direct2D/DirectWrite, plus the real benchmarks (base64 native/CN1/SIMD, image createMask/applyMask/modifyAlpha/PNG/JPEG, SSE2 SIMD kernels). Compared against the in-repo baseline in scripts/windows/screenshots.

Benchmark Results

Detailed Performance Metrics

Metric	Duration
SIMD kernel backend	SSE2 (x64) / NEON (arm64) native kernels
SIMD int-add (64K x300)	java 57ms / native 4ms = 14.2x speedup
SIMD float-mul (64K x300)	java 57ms / native 4ms = 14.2x speedup
SIMD kernel correctness	PASS (native result == scalar reference)
Base64 native bridge	unavailable (CN1 + SIMD + image benchmarks only)
Base64 payload size	8192 bytes
Base64 benchmark iterations	6000
Base64 SIMD byte path	gated to scalar (CPU autovectorizes scalar; explicit SIMD not beneficial here)
Base64 CN1 encode	74.000 ms
Base64 CN1 decode	90.000 ms
Base64 SIMD encode	109.000 ms
Base64 encode ratio (SIMD/CN1)	1.473x (47.3% slower)
Base64 SIMD decode	105.000 ms
Base64 decode ratio (SIMD/CN1)	1.167x (16.7% slower)
Image encode benchmark iterations	100
Image createMask (SIMD off)	9.000 ms
Image createMask (SIMD on)	2.000 ms
Image createMask ratio (SIMD on/off)	0.222x (77.8% faster)
Image applyMask (SIMD off)	41.000 ms
Image applyMask (SIMD on)	47.000 ms
Image applyMask ratio (SIMD on/off)	1.146x (14.6% slower)
Image modifyAlpha (SIMD off)	55.000 ms
Image modifyAlpha (SIMD on)	23.000 ms
Image modifyAlpha ratio (SIMD on/off)	0.418x (58.2% faster)
Image modifyAlpha removeColor (SIMD off)	35.000 ms
Image modifyAlpha removeColor (SIMD on)	23.000 ms
Image modifyAlpha removeColor ratio (SIMD on/off)	0.657x (34.3% faster)

ParparVM vs HotSpot (JDK 25): Windows x64

Runner CPU: AMD64 Family 25 Model 1 Stepping 1, AuthenticAMD (baseline windows-x64@amd64-family-25-model-1-authenticamd)

Ratios are ParparVM / JDK 25: below 1.00x ParparVM is faster (time) or smaller (RAM). Median of 5 interleaved, paired rounds; every run's output was verified. A ratio more than 20% (time) / 25% (RAM) above its baseline in vm/selfhost/perf-baseline/ is a regression and fails; one that far below is an improvement, reported but not failed (a row whose calibration runs were noisier carries a wider tolerance), and for RAM the change must also exceed 0.05x in absolute terms. Both run unpinned on all of the runner's CPUs, with their own default thread counts.

Benchmark	Cores	Time	RAM	Status
hello (WinHelloMain)	4	1.52x (base 1.22x, +24.2%)	0.57x (base 0.94x, -39.3%)	ok
translator (self)	4	0.79x (base 0.83x, -5.4%)	0.54x (base 0.54x, +0.2%)	ok
intArithmetic	4	1.10x (base 1.10x, +0.0%)	0.06x (base 0.06x, +2.6%)	ok
longArithmetic	4	1.14x (base 1.08x, +5.1%)	0.06x (base 0.05x, +3.3%)	ok
mathTranscendental	4	0.79x (base 0.79x, -0.3%)	0.06x (base 0.06x, +2.8%)	ok
arraySequential	4	1.36x (base 1.36x, -0.3%)	0.39x (base 0.39x, +0.1%)	ok
arrayRandom	4	0.97x (base 1.06x, -8.6%)	0.23x (base 0.23x, +0.5%)	ok
objectAllocation	4	1.59x (base 1.56x, +2.2%)	0.30x (base 0.39x, -23.3%)	ok
valueEscape	4	0.10x (base 0.10x, +0.3%)	0.05x (base 0.04x, +4.5%)	ok
hashMapChurn	4	1.89x (base 1.80x, +5.3%)	0.09x (base 0.09x, -1.6%)	ok
stringBuilding	4	1.35x (base 1.22x, +10.8%)	0.32x (base 0.32x, +0.1%)	ok
recursion	4	1.41x (base 1.49x, -5.9%)	0.06x (base 0.06x, +1.6%)	ok
quicksort	4	1.11x (base 1.13x, -2.3%)	0.12x (base 0.12x, +0.9%)	ok

Result: no regression

shai-almog · 2026-10-27T14:56:28Z

Compared 206 screenshots: 206 matched.
Native Linux port (x64), GTK3/Cairo/Pango, ParparVM bytecode-to-C (no JVM): the hellocodenameone screenshot suite rendered by a native ELF built + run on the GitHub x64 runner. Baseline: scripts/linux/screenshots.

ParparVM vs HotSpot (JDK 25): Linux x64

Runner CPU: Intel(R) Xeon(R) Platinum 8370C CPU @ 2.80GHz (baseline linux-x64@intel-xeon-platinum-8370c)

Ratios are ParparVM / JDK 25: below 1.00x ParparVM is faster (time) or smaller (RAM). Median of 5 interleaved, paired rounds; every run's output was verified. A ratio more than 20% (time) / 25% (RAM) above its baseline in vm/selfhost/perf-baseline/ is a regression and fails; one that far below is an improvement, reported but not failed (a row whose calibration runs were noisier carries a wider tolerance), and for RAM the change must also exceed 0.05x in absolute terms. Both run unpinned on all of the runner's CPUs, with their own default thread counts.

Benchmark	Cores	Time	RAM	Status
hello (LinuxHelloMain)	4	0.89x (base 0.90x, -0.8%)	0.68x (base 0.78x, -12.8%)	ok
translator (self)	4	0.58x (base 0.53x, +8.7%)	0.40x (base 0.43x, -6.2%)	ok
intArithmetic	4	1.03x (base 1.03x, +0.0%)	0.06x (base 0.06x, -0.8%)	ok
longArithmetic	4	1.01x (base 1.01x, +0.1%)	0.06x (base 0.05x, +2.5%)	ok
mathTranscendental	4	1.03x (base 1.03x, -0.3%)	0.06x (base 0.06x, +2.1%)	ok
arraySequential	4	2.04x (base 2.52x, -19.1%)	0.36x (base 0.35x, +0.5%)	ok
arrayRandom	4	0.99x (base 1.01x, -1.8%)	0.21x (base 0.21x, +0.7%)	ok
objectAllocation	4	1.25x (base 1.21x, +3.9%)	0.40x (base 0.50x, -20.0%)	ok
valueEscape	4	0.13x (base 0.13x, -0.2%)	0.05x (base 0.04x, +11.7%)	ok
hashMapChurn	4	1.02x (base 1.09x, -6.5%)	0.10x (base 0.10x, -5.0%)	ok
stringBuilding	4	1.59x (base 1.56x, +2.3%)	0.26x (base 0.26x, +1.6%)	ok
recursion	4	1.05x (base 1.30x, -19.0%)	0.06x (base 0.07x, -23.6%)	ok
quicksort	4	1.09x (base 1.06x, +2.7%)	0.11x (base 0.13x, -11.0%)	ok

Result: no regression

shai-almog · 2026-10-27T14:56:36Z

Compared 206 screenshots: 206 matched.
Native Linux port (arm64), GTK3/Cairo/Pango, ParparVM bytecode-to-C (no JVM): the hellocodenameone screenshot suite rendered by a native ELF built + run on the GitHub arm64 runner. Baseline: scripts/linux/screenshots-arm.

ParparVM vs HotSpot (JDK 25): Linux arm64

Runner CPU: Neoverse-N2 (baseline linux-arm64@neoverse-n2)

Ratios are ParparVM / JDK 25: below 1.00x ParparVM is faster (time) or smaller (RAM). Median of 5 interleaved, paired rounds; every run's output was verified. A ratio more than 20% (time) / 25% (RAM) above its baseline in vm/selfhost/perf-baseline/ is a regression and fails; one that far below is an improvement, reported but not failed (a row whose calibration runs were noisier carries a wider tolerance), and for RAM the change must also exceed 0.05x in absolute terms. Both run unpinned on all of the runner's CPUs, with their own default thread counts.

Benchmark	Cores	Time	RAM	Status
hello (LinuxHelloMain)	4	0.97x (base 1.02x, -4.5%)	0.65x (base 0.93x, -29.9%)	ok
translator (self)	4	0.75x (base 0.70x, +6.9%)	0.48x (base 0.43x, +11.9%)	ok
intArithmetic	4	1.04x (base 1.04x, -0.0%)	0.03x (base 0.03x, +4.3%)	ok
longArithmetic	4	0.79x (base 0.79x, -0.2%)	0.03x (base 0.03x, +4.9%)	ok
mathTranscendental	4	1.10x (base 1.10x, -0.3%)	0.04x (base 0.03x, +9.5%)	ok
arraySequential	4	0.36x (base 0.36x, -1.8%)	0.37x (base 0.37x, +0.2%)	ok
arrayRandom	4	0.94x (base 0.94x, +0.0%)	0.20x (base 0.20x, +0.4%)	ok
objectAllocation	4	1.94x (base 1.77x, +9.6%)	0.37x (base 0.37x, -0.1%)	ok
valueEscape	4	0.51x (base 0.51x, -0.1%)	0.03x (base 0.03x, +4.6%)	ok
hashMapChurn	4	0.84x (base 0.84x, -0.7%)	0.12x (base 0.12x, +0.9%)	ok
stringBuilding	4	1.44x (base 1.57x, -8.0%)	0.26x (base 0.26x, +0.2%)	ok
recursion	4	1.45x (base 1.43x, +1.3%)	0.04x (base 0.04x, +2.8%)	ok
quicksort	4	1.01x (base 0.99x, +1.2%)	0.09x (base 0.09x, +1.1%)	ok

Result: no regression

shai-almog · 2026-10-27T15:18:41Z

Compared 206 screenshots: 206 matched.
Native Windows port (arm64 / Apple Silicon - Arm): full hellocodenameone screenshot suite rendered offscreen with Direct2D/DirectWrite, plus the real benchmarks (base64 native/CN1/SIMD, image createMask/applyMask/modifyAlpha/PNG/JPEG, NEON SIMD kernels). Compared against the in-repo baseline in scripts/windows/screenshots.

Benchmark Results

Detailed Performance Metrics

Metric	Duration
SIMD kernel backend	SSE2 (x64) / NEON (arm64) native kernels
SIMD int-add (64K x300)	java 49ms / native 3ms = 16.3x speedup
SIMD float-mul (64K x300)	java 49ms / native 3ms = 16.3x speedup
SIMD kernel correctness	PASS (native result == scalar reference)
Base64 native bridge	unavailable (CN1 + SIMD + image benchmarks only)
Base64 payload size	8192 bytes
Base64 benchmark iterations	6000
Base64 SIMD byte path	gated to scalar (CPU autovectorizes scalar; explicit SIMD not beneficial here)
Base64 CN1 encode	59.000 ms
Base64 CN1 decode	71.000 ms
Base64 SIMD encode	77.000 ms
Base64 encode ratio (SIMD/CN1)	1.305x (30.5% slower)
Base64 SIMD decode	73.000 ms
Base64 decode ratio (SIMD/CN1)	1.028x (2.8% slower)
Image encode benchmark iterations	100
Image createMask (SIMD off)	6.000 ms
Image createMask (SIMD on)	2.000 ms
Image createMask ratio (SIMD on/off)	0.333x (66.7% faster)
Image applyMask (SIMD off)	27.000 ms
Image applyMask (SIMD on)	29.000 ms
Image applyMask ratio (SIMD on/off)	1.074x (7.4% slower)
Image modifyAlpha (SIMD off)	19.000 ms
Image modifyAlpha (SIMD on)	18.000 ms
Image modifyAlpha ratio (SIMD on/off)	0.947x (5.3% faster)
Image modifyAlpha removeColor (SIMD off)	14.000 ms
Image modifyAlpha removeColor (SIMD on)	15.000 ms
Image modifyAlpha removeColor ratio (SIMD on/off)	1.071x (7.1% slower)

ParparVM vs HotSpot (JDK 25): Windows arm64

Runner CPU: ARMv8 (64-bit) Family 8 Model D49 Revision 0, MICROSOFT CORPORATION (baseline windows-arm64@armv8-64-bit-family-8-model-d49-microsoft-corporation)

Ratios are ParparVM / JDK 25: below 1.00x ParparVM is faster (time) or smaller (RAM). Median of 5 interleaved, paired rounds; every run's output was verified. A ratio more than 20% (time) / 25% (RAM) above its baseline in vm/selfhost/perf-baseline/ is a regression and fails; one that far below is an improvement, reported but not failed (a row whose calibration runs were noisier carries a wider tolerance), and for RAM the change must also exceed 0.05x in absolute terms. Both run unpinned on all of the runner's CPUs, with their own default thread counts.

Benchmark	Cores	Time	RAM	Status
hello (WinHelloMain)	4	1.00x (base 1.11x, -9.7%)	0.59x (base 0.75x, -21.7%)	ok
translator (self)	4	0.89x (base 0.84x, +5.8%)	0.49x (base 0.51x, -3.6%)	ok
intArithmetic	4	1.04x (base 1.04x, +0.0%)	0.06x (base 0.06x, +2.8%)	ok
longArithmetic	4	0.79x (base 0.80x, -0.1%)	0.06x (base 0.06x, +3.3%)	ok
mathTranscendental	4	0.72x (base 0.72x, -0.0%)	0.07x (base 0.06x, +1.6%)	ok
arraySequential	4	0.38x (base 0.46x, -16.7%)	0.39x (base 0.39x, +0.1%)	ok
arrayRandom	4	0.94x (base 0.94x, -0.1%)	0.23x (base 0.23x, +0.2%)	ok
objectAllocation	4	1.77x (base 1.82x, -2.8%)	0.41x (base 0.43x, -4.9%)	ok
valueEscape	4	0.76x (base 0.76x, +0.1%)	0.05x (base 0.05x, +3.3%)	ok
hashMapChurn	4	0.99x (base 0.98x, +0.6%)	0.12x (base 0.12x, -1.8%)	ok
stringBuilding	4	1.60x (base 1.43x, +12.3%)	0.27x (base 0.27x, -0.2%)	ok
recursion	4	1.56x (base 1.46x, +6.2%)	0.07x (base 0.07x, +1.1%)	ok
quicksort	4	1.00x (base 1.00x, +0.2%)	0.12x (base 0.12x, +0.5%)	ok

Result: no regression

shai-almog · 2026-10-27T15:40:30Z

Compared 189 screenshots: 189 matched.
✅ Native iOS Metal screenshot tests passed.

Benchmark Results

VM Translation Time: 0 seconds
Compilation Time: 2603 seconds

Build and Run Timing

Metric	Duration
Simulator Boot	83000 ms
Simulator Boot (Run)	3000 ms
App Install	40000 ms
App Launch	51000 ms
Test Execution	470000 ms

Detailed Performance Metrics

Metric	Duration
SIMD kernel backend	SSE2 (x64) / NEON (arm64) native kernels
SIMD int-add (64K x300)	java 287ms / native 5ms = 57.4x speedup
SIMD float-mul (64K x300)	java 132ms / native 12ms = 11.0x speedup
SIMD kernel correctness	PASS (native result == scalar reference)
Base64 payload size	8192 bytes
Base64 benchmark iterations	6000
Base64 SIMD byte path	active (NEON-accelerated)
Base64 CN1 encode	72.000 ms
Base64 CN1 decode	83.000 ms
Base64 native encode	1870.000 ms
Base64 encode ratio (CN1/native)	0.039x (96.1% faster)
Base64 native decode	1168.000 ms
Base64 decode ratio (CN1/native)	0.071x (92.9% faster)
Base64 SIMD encode	77.000 ms
Base64 encode ratio (SIMD/CN1)	1.069x (6.9% slower)
Base64 SIMD decode	80.000 ms
Base64 decode ratio (SIMD/CN1)	0.964x (3.6% faster)
Base64 encode ratio (SIMD/native)	0.041x (95.9% faster)
Base64 decode ratio (SIMD/native)	0.068x (93.2% faster)
Image encode benchmark iterations	100
Image createMask (SIMD off)	10.000 ms
Image createMask (SIMD on)	190.000 ms
Image createMask ratio (SIMD on/off)	19.000x (1800.0% slower)
Image applyMask (SIMD off)	42.000 ms
Image applyMask (SIMD on)	40.000 ms
Image applyMask ratio (SIMD on/off)	0.952x (4.8% faster)
Image modifyAlpha (SIMD off)	74.000 ms
Image modifyAlpha (SIMD on)	43.000 ms
Image modifyAlpha ratio (SIMD on/off)	0.581x (41.9% faster)
Image modifyAlpha removeColor (SIMD off)	63.000 ms
Image modifyAlpha removeColor (SIMD on)	383.000 ms
Image modifyAlpha removeColor ratio (SIMD on/off)	6.079x (507.9% slower)

github-actions · 2026-10-27T15:42:03Z

✅ ByteCodeTranslator Quality Report

Test & Coverage

✅ Tests: 882 total, 0 failed, 55 skipped

Benchmark Results

Execution Time: 10039 ms
Hotspots (Top 20 sampled methods):
- 11.36% com.codename1.tools.translator.IteratorEscape.mangle (175 samples)
- 7.14% java.lang.System.identityHashCode (110 samples)
- 5.32% java.util.ArrayList.indexOf (82 samples)
- 5.13% com.codename1.tools.translator.BytecodeMethod.equals (79 samples)
- 4.87% com.codename1.tools.translator.classfile.analysis.Frame.execute (75 samples)
- 4.61% com.codename1.tools.translator.BytecodeMethod.updateInlinableFieldDependencies (71 samples)
- 4.28% java.lang.Object.hashCode (66 samples)
- 2.60% java.lang.String.equals (40 samples)
- 2.47% java.lang.StringBuilder.append (38 samples)
- 1.82% com.codename1.tools.translator.ByteCodeClass.hasDeclaredMethod (28 samples)
- 1.69% com.codename1.tools.translator.IteratorEscape.ctorOnlyStoresParamsIntoThis (26 samples)
- 1.56% com.codename1.tools.translator.JavascriptReachability.enqueueResolved (24 samples)
- 1.56% java.util.HashMap.hash (24 samples)
- 1.36% java.util.HashMap.putVal (21 samples)
- 1.17% com.codename1.tools.translator.classfile.tree.JsrInliner.replay (18 samples)
- 1.10% com.codename1.tools.translator.Parser.cullMethods (17 samples)
- 1.10% java.util.AbstractCollection.containsAll (17 samples)
- 1.04% com.codename1.tools.translator.ByteCodeClass.generateCCode (16 samples)
- 0.91% com.codename1.tools.translator.ByteCodeClass.markDependencies (14 samples)
- 0.91% java.lang.StringCoding.encode (14 samples)
⚠️ Coverage report not generated.

Static Analysis

✅ SpotBugs: no findings (report was not generated by the build).
⚠️ PMD report not generated.
⚠️ Checkstyle report not generated.

Generated automatically by the PR CI workflow.

shai-almog and others added 2 commits October 27, 2026 14:37

Drop the remaining references to the old PMD forbidden list

1617be9

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>

shai-almog merged commit 9ed98ca into master Oct 27, 2026
72 of 79 checks passed

shai-almog deleted the pmd-zero-findings-gate branch October 27, 2026 16:17

Navigation Menu

Repository navigation

ci: make PMD a zero-findings gate - #6119

ci: make PMD a zero-findings gate#6119
shai-almog merged 3 commits into
masterfrom
pmd-zero-findings-gate

shai-almog commented Oct 27, 2026

Uh oh!

shai-almog commented Oct 27, 2026 •

edited

Loading

Uh oh!

shai-almog commented Oct 27, 2026 •

edited

Loading

Uh oh!

shai-almog commented Oct 27, 2026 •

edited

Loading

Uh oh!

github-actions Bot commented Oct 27, 2026

Uh oh!

shai-almog commented Oct 27, 2026 •

edited

Loading

Uh oh!

shai-almog commented Oct 27, 2026 •

edited

Loading

Uh oh!

shai-almog commented Oct 27, 2026 •

edited

Loading

Uh oh!

shai-almog commented Oct 27, 2026 •

edited

Loading

Uh oh!

shai-almog commented Oct 27, 2026 •

edited

Loading

Uh oh!

github-actions Bot commented Oct 27, 2026

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Uh oh!

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

1 participant

Conversation

shai-almog commented Oct 27, 2026

Uh oh!

shai-almog commented Oct 27, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

shai-almog commented Oct 27, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Benchmark Results

Detailed Performance Metrics

Uh oh!

shai-almog commented Oct 27, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Native Android coverage

Native Android coverage

Benchmark Results

Detailed Performance Metrics

Uh oh!

github-actions Bot commented Oct 27, 2026

✅ Continuous Quality Report

Test & Coverage

Static Analysis

Uh oh!

shai-almog commented Oct 27, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Benchmark Results

Detailed Performance Metrics

ParparVM vs HotSpot (JDK 25): Windows x64

Uh oh!

shai-almog commented Oct 27, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

ParparVM vs HotSpot (JDK 25): Linux x64

Uh oh!

shai-almog commented Oct 27, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

ParparVM vs HotSpot (JDK 25): Linux arm64

Uh oh!

shai-almog commented Oct 27, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Benchmark Results

Detailed Performance Metrics

ParparVM vs HotSpot (JDK 25): Windows arm64

Uh oh!

shai-almog commented Oct 27, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Benchmark Results

Build and Run Timing

Detailed Performance Metrics

Uh oh!

github-actions Bot commented Oct 27, 2026

✅ ByteCodeTranslator Quality Report

Test & Coverage

Benchmark Results

Static Analysis

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Uh oh!

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

1 participant

shai-almog commented Oct 27, 2026 •

edited

Loading

shai-almog commented Oct 27, 2026 •

edited

Loading

shai-almog commented Oct 27, 2026 •

edited

Loading

shai-almog commented Oct 27, 2026 •

edited

Loading

shai-almog commented Oct 27, 2026 •

edited

Loading

shai-almog commented Oct 27, 2026 •

edited

Loading

shai-almog commented Oct 27, 2026 •

edited

Loading

shai-almog commented Oct 27, 2026 •

edited

Loading