Adds Benchmark for XSS detection, minor refactor/optimization

[M4tteoP]

This PR:

• Adds a Benchmark test for XSS detection
• Reduces functions called inside interactions (still no performance improvements, I think mainly because of the small amount of data iterated)
• Has minor refactors in favor of Go idioms rather than C ones.

Benchmark Before/After:

name                  old time/op    new time/op   delta
XSSDriver/html5-10    42.5µs ± 3%    41.2µs ± 1%  -3.19%  (p=0.000 n=100+86)

[anuraaga]

It'd probably be good to add some test case files with larger strings if it seems like it'd be useful for performance testing, there's no reason to avoid them for unit testing anyways

[anuraaga]

XSSDriver/html5-10 42.5µs ± 3% 41.2µs ± 1% -3.19% (p=0.000 n=100+86)

Can you add some logic to check for, or at least debug that the benchmark is actually running code? Even if the inputs are all small, there are about 60 test case files meaning <1 microsecond per case, this seems too low. Nothing seems obviously wrong with the code from reading it though 🤔

[codecov-commenter]

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 44.18605% with 24 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 91.41%. Comparing base (243c29f) to head (5a2e0ef).
Report is 3 commits behind head on master.

❗ Current head 5a2e0ef differs from pull request most recent head 3e0beba

Please upload reports for the commit 3e0beba to get more accurate results.

Files	Patch %	Lines
xss_helpers.go	40.00%	23 Missing and 1 partial ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master      #13      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   90.21%   91.41%   +1.20%     
==========================================
  Files           8        8              
  Lines        1523     1515       -8     
==========================================
+ Hits         1374     1385      +11     
+ Misses        128      105      -23     
- Partials       21       25       +4     

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

[sonarqubecloud]

Kudos, SonarCloud Quality Gate passed!   

0 Bugs
0 Vulnerabilities
0 Security Hotspots
1 Code Smell

No Coverage information
0.0% Duplication

[fzipi]

@M4tteoP Can you push some additional larger texts for #13 (review) ?

[fzipi]

ping @M4tteoP

[M4tteoP]

Requires #18

[sonarqubecloud]

Quality Gate passed

The SonarCloud Quality Gate passed, but some issues were introduced.

1 New issue
0 Security Hotspots
No data about Coverage
0.0% Duplication on New Code

See analysis details on SonarCloud

[fzipi]

What is needed here? @M4tteoP

[sonarqubecloud]

Quality Gate passed

Issues
1 New issue
0 Accepted issues

Measures
0 Security Hotspots
No data about Coverage
0.0% Duplication on New Code

See analysis details on SonarCloud

[M4tteoP]

If you are happy with the additional larger texts added, it is ready to be merged from my side

[fzipi]

I'm always happy. Let's go!