revert(perf): retire unmeasured R micro-optimizations

[seonghobae]

No-valid-delta closure after repair.

Fresh review applied the repository's numerical-behavior guardrail rather than treating passing legacy tests as performance evidence. The branch originally mixed two micro-optimizations with broad 2–3× claims but supplied no repository-controlled benchmark artifact fixing representative data shapes/classes, R/runtime version, CPU, warm-up/repetition, allocation/GC, or an end-to-end calibration/linking performance measure.

The extrema rewrite was already withdrawn on predecessor repair 20fd14400e8329f865a1e1989d3c37a69578f836, and its generated .jules/bolt.md doctrine was removed. The only remaining production delta changed distinct-non-NA counting in R/aFIPC.R and R/surveyFA.R. Although review classified the common standard-vector result as numerically equivalent, this repository explicitly prioritizes historical numerical behavior in R/aFIPC.R and requires regression evidence before algorithmic edits. There was still no focused class/NA edge contract or measured buyer/runtime benefit justifying that production churn.

Repair head 50527c4441b5b6b1734f032777c7d7c6a2ddaf3e is a normal non-force descendant that adopts protected master@f87c2324f1686135e57d8730c1b0b9420874f300 while preserving all experimental history. Fresh compare is ahead-only (ahead_by=3, behind_by=0) with files=[]. Both informational review threads are resolved against the restored tree.

There is therefore no production/test/doc semantic delta left to integrate. A future optimization should start with a reproducible representative benchmark/profile, explicit equivalence fixtures for the affected R classes/NA cases, and then a minimal measured change.

[google-labs-jules]

👋 Jules, reporting for duty! I'm here to lend a hand with this pull request.

When you start a review, I'll add a 👀 emoji to each comment to let you know I've read it. I'll focus on feedback directed at me and will do my best to stay out of conversations between you and other bots or reviewers to keep the noise down.

I'll push a commit with your requested changes shortly after. Please note there might be a delay between these steps, but rest assured I'm on the job!

For more direct control, you can switch me to Reactive Mode. When this mode is on, I will only act on comments where you specifically mention me with @jules. You can find this option in the Pull Request section of your global Jules UI settings. You can always switch back!

New to Jules? Learn more at jules.google/docs.

---

For security, I will only act on instructions from the user who triggered this task.

[coderabbitai]

Warning

Review limit reached

Next included review available in 8 minutes.

Check out review usage here.

View limit details

Limit details: You’ve used the included review currently available.

You've used all free OSS reviews for now. Wait for the free limit to reset to keep reviewing this public repository.

Learn how review limits work.

Review configuration:

⚙️ Run configuration

Configuration used: Organization UI

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Team

Run ID: 8bfd9e60-5dd4-484b-95ad-9bc6dd66d74e

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 6e5f353 and 20fd144.

📒 Files selected for processing (1)

• R/surveyFA.R

No actionable comments were generated in the recent review. 🎉

ℹ️ Recent review info

⚙️ Run configuration

Configuration used: Organization UI

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Pro Plus

Run ID: d4627151-e398-4f57-8c74-882af3771ad7

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between f87c232 and 6e5f353.

📒 Files selected for processing (3)

• .jules/bolt.md
• R/aFIPC.R
• R/surveyFA.R

Included review availability: Your plan provides up to 1 included review per hour; 0 remain after this review.

---

📝 Walkthrough

Walkthrough

R 코드의 고유값 개수 계산을 sum(!is.na(unique(...)))로 변경했습니다. 최소 p-value 항목 선택에는 which.min()을 사용합니다. 두 최적화 내용을 학습 노트에 추가했습니다.

Changes

R 성능 최적화

Layer / File(s)	Summary
최적화 구현 및 학습 노트 R/aFIPC.R, R/surveyFA.R, .jules/bolt.md	NA가 아닌 고유값 개수를 직접 계산하도록 변경했습니다. 최소 p-value 항목 선택에서 전체 정렬을 제거하고 which.min()을 사용합니다. 두 변경 내용을 학습 노트에 기록했습니다.

Estimated code review effort: 2 (Simple) | ~10 minutes

Merge Risk: ⚪ Minimal · up to 6e5f3

This change replaces equivalent R implementations with more efficient minimum lookup and unique non-NA counting, with no actionable merge-blocking risk remaining after normal checks and review.

🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 5

✅ Passed checks (5 passed)

Check name	Status	Explanation
Description Check	✅ Passed	Check skipped - CodeRabbit’s high-level summary is enabled.
Title check	✅ Passed	제목은 R 성능 최적화라는 주요 변경 사항과 which.min, 유니크 개수 계산 최적화를 구체적으로 설명합니다. 변경 내용과 직접 관련되며 간결합니다.
Docstring Coverage	✅ Passed	No functions found in the changed files to evaluate docstring coverage. Skipping docstring coverage check. Docstring coverage is scoped to functions touched by this diff. Analyzed 0 functions across 0…
Linked Issues check	✅ Passed	Check skipped because no linked issues were found for this pull request.
Out of Scope Changes check	✅ Passed	Check skipped because no linked issues were found for this pull request.

Full details: Docstring Coverage

Explanation

No functions found in the changed files to evaluate docstring coverage. Skipping docstring coverage check. Docstring coverage is scoped to functions touched by this diff. Analyzed 0 functions across 0 files. (3 skipped: 3 unsupported.)

✨ Finishing Touches

🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)

• Create PR with unit tests
• Commit unit tests in branch bolt/optimize-which-min-and-unique-sum-13250550206503932288

---

Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out.

❤️ Share

• X
• Mastodon
• Reddit
• LinkedIn

_{Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands.}

[devin-ai-integration]

Devin Review found 2 potential issues.