bench: add raptorbt as a third engine, and a 10M-bar point (#6)

The harness compared two engines everywhere; it now compares N against a
reference. manifoldbt is the reference: every parity check and every ratio is
a challenger against it, never two challengers against each other.

raptorbt 0.9.0 joins on three of the four workloads. Its sma_cross comes back
bit-identical to the reference's final equity, and its rsi matches to the last
bit; its ema seeds on a different warmup and it has no fixed-quantity sizing,
so the fee workload records it as unsupported with the reason rather than
leaving a blank cell. On the bracket it diverges in its own documented way: it
never re-arms while the entry level holds, so it books exactly the reference's
round-trips minus the ones that re-enter on the exit bar.

Python moves to 3.12, which raptorbt pins rather than we do: it is built
against pyo3 0.20.3, whose maximum supported CPython is 3.12. Timings from runs
before this change are therefore not directly comparable.

The bar matrix gains 10M and the repetition default drops from 7 to 2. Measured,
those two almost cancel: the job stays around 16 minutes. macOS keeps its old
ceiling, since 10M bars adds 1.55 GB on vectorbt's side alone and that runner
has 7 GB.

.github/workflows/bench-vs-vectorbt.yml

@@ -4,9 +4,10 @@
 # published wheel from PyPI, exactly like any user would. That is what makes the
 # result independent rather than self-reported, and it is why anyone can fork
 # this repository and press "Run workflow" to reproduce the numbers on their own
-# runner.
+# runner. Same for the engines it is compared against: they come from PyPI at
+# pinned versions, and the run prints the versions it resolved.
 
-name: Benchmark vs vectorbt
+name: Benchmark vs vectorbt and raptorbt
 
 on:
   workflow_dispatch:
@@ -18,7 +19,14 @@ on:
       reps:
         description: "Interleaved repetitions per point"
         required: false
-        default: "7"
+        # 2, not 7. The budget went into a longer series instead: at 10M bars
+        # one vectorbt call costs 99 s, so seven of them would put the job past
+        # its timeout on Windows. Two repetitions still bracket the number (min,
+        # median and max are all published, and the median of two is their mean)
+        # but the noise flag gets cruder, since an interquartile range wants at
+        # least four samples to mean anything. A point that looks surprising is
+        # worth re-running at a higher `reps` before it is quoted anywhere.
+        default: "2"
   release:
     types: [published]
   schedule:
@@ -42,13 +50,15 @@ jobs:
       matrix:
         include:
           - os: ubuntu-latest
-            bars: "10000 100000 1000000 5000000"
+            bars: "10000 100000 1000000 5000000 10000000"
           - os: windows-latest
-            bars: "10000 100000 1000000 5000000"
+            bars: "10000 100000 1000000 5000000 10000000"
           # macOS runners ship 7 GB of RAM against 16 GB elsewhere, and vectorbt
           # materialises the simulation in memory (roughly 150 MB per million
           # bars, measured). The top size is trimmed so a point is never lost to
-          # swapping, which would time the disk instead of the engine.
+          # swapping, which would time the disk instead of the engine. The same
+          # arithmetic is why 10M bars is added on the other two and not here:
+          # measured, that point adds 1.55 GB on vectorbt's side alone.
           - os: macos-latest
             bars: "10000 100000 1000000"
 
@@ -60,7 +70,15 @@ jobs:
 
       - uses: actions/setup-python@v5
         with:
-          python-version: "3.13"
+          # 3.12, not 3.13, and it is raptorbt that pins it: it is built against
+          # pyo3 0.20.3, whose maximum supported CPython is 3.12. No release up
+          # to 0.9.0 publishes a cp313 wheel and a source build refuses outright
+          # ("the configured Python interpreter version (3.13) is newer than
+          # PyO3's maximum supported version (3.12)"). Comparing engines means
+          # running them in one environment, and the environment has to be one
+          # they all support. Runs before 2026-08-20 used 3.13 with two engines,
+          # so their absolute timings are not directly comparable with these.
+          python-version: "3.12"
 
       - name: Install engines from PyPI
         shell: bash
@@ -81,7 +99,7 @@ jobs:
 
       - name: Record the resolved environment
         shell: bash
-        run: pip freeze | grep -iE '^(manifoldbt|vectorbt|numpy|numba|pandas|psutil)=' || true
+        run: pip freeze | grep -iE '^(manifoldbt|vectorbt|raptorbt|numpy|numba|pandas|psutil)=' || true
 
       - name: Run the benchmark
         shell: bash