Jakub Dóka

Seems like I was misusing this for a while, nevertheless resulting error is not helpful, Would it be possible to integrate some verification for signatures?

you could also use an array container optimized for 1-based indexing, meaning that the base pointer is always offset by -1 to cancel the index +1 offset, tho miri will...

Maybe good solution would be listing on which LSP events should helix rerender, inside the config.

> Also, did you manage to benchmark this somehow? I ll try few benchmark strategies and will see. This should improve, so long as protocols don't change with each poll.

https://github.com/libp2p/rust-libp2p/pull/5026/files#diff-03e30a287d6b2160a5ec3615cbe96268d6a778f6c96656982d78946c3cb04dcbR935-R966 ``` hashset (bacb93ccdbd3347052b063ca7252943297c2be50) num protocols | time 2 564.58248ms 4 828.611434ms 10 1.632474501s 20 3.054404475s vec (d8417ea274c8a7a15f4965bc3d6e18a5c7f27791) num protocols | time 2 320.806934ms 4 420.014621ms 10 1.001984668s 20 2.789481624s...

I am now using hashmap with booleans to compute the diff, so no need to collect the protocols. ``` hashmap (98b2eb1ca01ac0b02950d4871c68408e7093fa64) num protocols | time 2 370.042196ms 4 497.035778ms 10...

finally this is results of benchmark on old code: ``` old code (b6bb02b9305b56ed2a4e2ff44b510fa84d8d7401) num protocols | time 2 728.680186ms 4 1.292526676s 10 3.098013194s 20 6.180503327s ```

@thomaseizinger I am curios what you think about the way I benchmark it

I realized am testing with very short protocol names so here is a little change ``` old code (b6bb02b9305b56ed2a4e2ff44b510fa84d8d7401) 2 770.244421ms 4 1.382793447s 10 3.299081332s 20 6.912836208s this pr (c271dbd76cb2013f1f976c2698be9d2c185e21f4)...

@thomaseizinger, hey, did I miss something that still needs to be done?