This is simply not true. So sad. We removed benchmarks from the docs completely ...

LtWorf · on July 8, 2023

> This is simply not true. So sad.

Ah sorry, so, just coincidentally pydantic happened to be slower than any other library that had a PR to be added to the benchmark, but that was not the reason they were rejected.

Better now?

> Please show me a sensible benchmark where your library is faster than pydantic?

    $ python3 perftest/realistic\ union\ of\ objects\ as\ namedtuple.py --pydantic
    (1.2192879340145737, 1.2595951650291681)
    $ python3 perftest/realistic\ union\ of\ objects\ as\ namedtuple.py --typedload
    (1.0874736839905381, 1.114147917018272)

I'm not a math genius but I'm fairly sure that 1.08 is less than 1.21.

So much for your invite to be gentle and cooperative :D (https://github.com/ltworf/typedload/pull/422)

scolvin · on July 8, 2023

¯\_(ツ)_/¯ - I get different results, see the PR.

LtWorf · on July 11, 2023

It seems you're running on apple. I really can't reproduce since i don't own one, and unless I get it as a gift I never will.

Anyway no server code runs on apple, so it isn't that important to win benchmarks only on apple, I think.