Dmitry Dygalo
Dmitry Dygalo
What would be the expected behavior then? from the validation point of view
Ref: https://github.com/ijl/orjson/commit/f5b4bb107693bc2c115783e9425f70009e92fca0
@macisamuele Would love to see that PR :)
I'll try to provide some feedback tomorrow
Yep, it does sound right to me! :) However, I think that in the end there will be no "basic" keywords - probably all keywords can be combined and at...
cc @macisamuele as you are working on #63 - this issue might affect your implementation. If we'll go extreme, then we might not need iterations at all, only apply common...
There is another place where it can be reused - #46 , but it is probably too early to estimate :) I will do some experiments once I'll get there...
Oh ... even worse: `9007199254740995f64` is `9007199254740996.0`, the same for Python ... so, it is basically how floating-point numbers are represented. Probably we can skip them
Indeed, I found multiple cases when was testing the Python bindings in #54 with Hypothesis - some of them are inevitable like `9007199254740995f64` which has the same behavior in Python...
Yes, my attempts gave me worse results than a single thread implementation :( But, I believe the problem was that I didn't use any heuristic about when to run validation...