# Code Review Issues - compiler-benchmarks

## SHOULD_FIX Issues

### 1. Missing Test Coverage for Benchmark Execution
**Severity:** should_fix
**File:** benches/compiler_benchmarks.rs
**Issue:** The acceptance criteria's testing strategy mentions "Functional tests: Run cargo bench --bench compiler_benchmarks and verify all 3 benchmarks execute successfully" but no actual test file was created to automate this verification. While the benchmarks were manually verified to run successfully, there's no automated test coverage ensuring they continue to work correctly.

**Context:** The issue specification includes a detailed testing strategy with test categories and run commands, but these tests were not implemented. This means future changes could break the benchmarks without immediate detection in CI/CD pipelines.

**Recommendation:** Consider adding a test file (e.g., `tests/benchmark_smoke_test.rs`) that verifies the benchmarks can be compiled and basic sanity checks pass, or document that manual verification is the intended approach for benchmarks.

---

## Summary

All acceptance criteria are met:
- ✅ benches/compiler_benchmarks.rs created with all three benchmarks
- ✅ Pre-parsing strategy correctly isolates compiler performance
- ✅ Criterion generates estimates.json for all benchmarks
- ✅ CV < 5% achieved for all benchmarks (3.3%, 4.8%, 4.0%)

The implementation follows the same pattern as existing lexer and parser benchmarks, correctly uses `black_box` to prevent optimizations, and matches all architectural requirements. The code is clean, well-commented, and the Cargo.toml configuration is correct.

The only improvement area is the lack of automated test coverage for benchmark execution, which is a nice-to-have but not blocking for merge.
