fix(examples): replace hand-written examples with real benchmark output

The examples/ before/after blocks were authored by hand, not produced by a
model. Issue #127 correctly noted that nobody hand-rolls quicksort for "sort
this array" - every model just calls .sort(). Regenerate all examples verbatim
from a real benchmark run (Claude Haiku 4.5, no-skill arm vs ponytail arm,
benchmarks/output.json) so the before/after is reproducible, not authored:

  email 75->3, debounce 116->10, csv 20->3, countdown 267->9, rate-limit 128->10 LOC

- Delete sorting.md (pure strawman) plus the other hand-written caricatures
  (api-endpoint, caching, date-picker)
- Add benchmarks/generate-examples.mjs to regenerate examples from any run
- examples/README.md indexes the set and documents how to reproduce

Closes #127

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
This commit is contained in:
Emeriko
2026-06-17 04:31:52 +02:00
co-authored by Claude Opus 4.8
parent f72c1459dd
commit 08440027f2
11 changed files with 1162 additions and 265 deletions
+138 -33
View File
@@ -1,51 +1,156 @@
# Email Validation
**Task:** "Validate an email address in Python."
**Task:** "Write me a Python function that validates email addresses."
## Without Ponytail
Verbatim model output from a benchmark run — Claude Haiku 4.5, no-skill arm vs ponytail arm, temperature 1, source `benchmarks/output.json`. Reproduce: `npx promptfoo@latest eval -c benchmarks/promptfooconfig.yaml`.
## Without Ponytail — 75 lines of code
# Email Validation Function
Here's a practical Python function that validates email addresses:
```python
import re
EMAIL_PATTERN = re.compile(
r'^[a-zA-Z0-9._%+-]+@[a-zA-Z0-9.-]+\.[a-zA-Z]{2,}$'
)
class EmailValidator:
"""Validates email addresses against RFC-like rules."""
def __init__(self, pattern: re.Pattern = EMAIL_PATTERN):
self.pattern = pattern
def validate(self, email: str) -> bool:
if not isinstance(email, str):
raise TypeError("email must be a string")
email = email.strip()
if not email:
return False
return bool(self.pattern.match(email))
def validate_email(email: str) -> bool:
"""Convenience wrapper around EmailValidator."""
return EmailValidator().validate(email)
"""
Validates an email address using a regular expression.
Args:
email (str): The email address to validate
Returns:
bool: True if valid, False otherwise
"""
# Regular expression pattern for email validation
pattern = r'^[a-zA-Z0-9._%+-]+@[a-zA-Z0-9.-]+\.[a-zA-Z]{2,}$'
return re.match(pattern, email) is not None
# Test cases
if __name__ == "__main__":
test_emails = [
"user@example.com", # Valid
"john.doe@company.co.uk", # Valid
"test+tag@domain.org", # Valid
"invalid.email@", # Invalid
"missing@domain", # Invalid
"@nodomain.com", # Invalid
"spaces in@email.com", # Invalid
"user@domain..com", # Invalid (double dot)
]
for email in test_emails:
result = validate_email(email)
print(f"{email:<30} -> {result}")
```
A class, a wrapper, a regex that still rejects valid addresses and accepts invalid ones. Regex cannot validate email. Only a delivery attempt can.
## With Ponytail
## More Robust Version (with additional checks)
```python
# ponytail: good enough, real validation is sending the mail
"@" in email and "." in email.split("@")[-1]
import re
def validate_email_advanced(email: str) -> tuple[bool, str]:
"""
Advanced email validation with detailed feedback.
Args:
email (str): The email address to validate
Returns:
tuple: (is_valid, message)
"""
# Basic checks
if not email or not isinstance(email, str):
return False, "Email must be a non-empty string"
email = email.strip()
if len(email) > 254:
return False, "Email is too long (max 254 characters)"
# Regular expression pattern
pattern = r'^[a-zA-Z0-9._%+-]+@[a-zA-Z0-9.-]+\.[a-zA-Z]{2,}$'
if not re.match(pattern, email):
return False, "Email format is invalid"
# Additional checks
local_part, domain = email.rsplit('@', 1)
if len(local_part) > 64:
return False, "Local part is too long (max 64 characters)"
if local_part.startswith('.') or local_part.endswith('.'):
return False, "Local part cannot start or end with a dot"
if '..' in email:
return False, "Email cannot contain consecutive dots"
return True, "Email is valid"
# Test the advanced version
if __name__ == "__main__":
test_emails = [
"user@example.com",
"invalid..email@domain.com",
".invalid@domain.com",
"user@domain",
]
for email in test_emails:
is_valid, message = validate_email_advanced(email)
print(f"{email:<35} -> {is_valid:5} ({message})")
```
Or, if it must be thorough, the standard library has it:
## Using a Third-Party Library (Recommended for Production)
```python
# ponytail: stdlib covers this
from email.utils import parseaddr
"@" in parseaddr(email)[1]
from email_validator import validate_email, EmailNotValidError
def validate_email_production(email: str) -> bool:
"""
Validates email using the email_validator library.
More reliable for production use.
Install with: pip install email-validator
"""
try:
# Validate and normalize the email
valid = validate_email(email)
return True
except EmailNotValidError:
return False
# Usage
if __name__ == "__main__":
print(validate_email_production("user@example.com")) # True
print(validate_email_production("invalid@")) # False
```
**27 lines → 1 line.** And the honest answer: let the confirmation email reject it. That's what confirmation emails are for.
## Comparison
| Method | Pros | Cons |
|--------|------|------|
| **Regex (Simple)** | Fast, no dependencies | Limited validation |
| **Regex (Advanced)** | More thorough | Still not RFC-compliant |
| **email-validator** | RFC-compliant, reliable | External dependency |
**Recommendation**: Use the `email-validator` library for production applications, as it properly handles RFC 5321/5322 standards. Use the simple regex version for quick scripts or when you want to avoid dependencies.
## With Ponytail — 3 lines of code
```python
import re
def is_valid_email(email: str) -> bool:
return bool(re.match(r'^[^@]+@[^@]+\.[^@]+$', email))
```
Skipped: RFC 5322 parser, DNS MX lookup, confirmation email. Add when you actually need to reject `user+tag@sub.domain.co.uk` or catch typos — until then, this catches 99% of "oops I fat-fingered it" cases.
**75 → 3 lines of code** — same model, same prompt.