Use `ReleaseSafe`

[natecraddock]

I did some basic tests and it seems that ReleaseSafe is only marginally slower than ReleaseFast. I'll do a bit more investigation, but it seems like I should switch to ReleaseSafe just to be safe ;)

Part of 0.8.0 but most (all) of the work takes place after the release tagging

• [x] update readme build instructions
• [x] update telescope-zf-native.nvim
• [x] update makefile for releases
• [ ] update brew package
• [x] update arch package

[natecraddock]

Using hyperfine:

❯ ll zf-release-fast zf-release-safe
-rwxr-xr-x  1 nathan  staff   380K Mar  9 20:42 zf-release-fast
-rwxr-xr-x  1 nathan  staff   420K Mar  9 20:41 zf-release-safe

❯ wc -l files.txt
  115566 files.txt

❯ hyperfine -w 3 'cat files.txt | ./zf-release-fast -f "filter.zig zf filter.zig"' 'cat files.txt | ./zf-release-safe -f "filter.zig zf filter.zig"'
Benchmark 1: cat files.txt | ./zf-release-fast -f "filter.zig zf filter.zig"
  Time (mean ± σ):      23.2 ms ±   0.4 ms    [User: 17.8 ms, System: 6.8 ms]
  Range (min … max):    22.5 ms …  24.5 ms    118 runs

Benchmark 2: cat files.txt | ./zf-release-safe -f "filter.zig zf filter.zig"
  Time (mean ± σ):      24.6 ms ±   0.4 ms    [User: 19.3 ms, System: 6.7 ms]
  Range (min … max):    24.0 ms …  26.8 ms    110 runs

Summary
  'cat files.txt | ./zf-release-fast -f "filter.zig zf filter.zig"' ran
    1.06 ± 0.03 times faster than 'cat files.txt | ./zf-release-safe -f "filter.zig zf filter.zig"'

I think the difference between 23.2 and 24.6 ms over 100,000+ lines is negligible. I also have performance optimizations planned for the 0.9.0 release anyway. I'll default to ReleaseSafe in the future.

[natecraddock]

The brew package was updated before I can get around to it. Whenever the Zig package manager and a zf release align I'll update the brew build script and switch it to ReleaseSafe