perf(utils/buffer): use promise all for better performance

[yasuaki640]

Changed to use Promise.all in the timignSafeEqual function to improve performance.

Measurement Results and Discussion

Here we share benchmark results for timingSafeEqual and (using Promise.all) timingSafeEqual2 .

https://github.com/yasuaki640/timingSafeEqual-bench/actions/runs/9646432337/job/26602824121
(Click on the Run Benchmarks section to see the benchmark results )

We observed a 1.6 ~ 2x performance improvement (except for the last case) for the test cases present in buffer.test.ts.

The only performance degradation was in the following case

hono/src/utils/buffer.test.ts

Line 72 in a9d5313

expect(await timingSafeEqual('a', 'b', () => undefined)).toBe(false)

(The timingSafeEqual-bench repository has the following measurements)

https://github.com/yasuaki640/timingSafeEqual-bench/blob/ab3f59b0edc28e1607bbea139490023e88cdb2f1/timingSafeEqual.bench.ts#L232-L242

Probably due to the overhead of Promise.all itself.

However, to begin with, the mean execution time of this case is two orders of magnitude smaller than the other cases, and we are passing a (extremely short processing time) test function such as () => undefined.

Therefore, we believe that using Promise.all is more beneficial than the degradation of this case, noting the performance improvement in all other cases.

The author should do the following, if applicable

• Add tests
• Run tests
• bun run format:fix && bun run lint:fix to format the code
• Add TSDoc/JSDoc to document the code

[codecov]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 95.83%. Comparing base (a9d5313) to head (d3947c0).

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #3031      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   95.83%   95.83%   -0.01%     
==========================================
  Files         137      137              
  Lines       13399    13398       -1     
  Branches     2250     2266      +16     
==========================================
- Hits        12841    12840       -1     
  Misses        558      558              

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

[yusukebe]

LGTM!

[yusukebe]

Hi @yasuaki640

The implementation and measuring performance are both great. I'll merge this now. Thanks!