Skip to content

Conversation

@aardvark179
Copy link
Contributor

@gbrail here is the stuff @balajirrao and I had worked on a while ago, but never made it to a PR due to other commitments. I believe this should resolve almost all of the regression mentioned in #2227. The main idea is to take a fairly optimised approach for the common cases, while still being able to take a slower approach where needed for spec compliance.

@gbrail
Copy link
Collaborator

gbrail commented Dec 22, 2025

Thanks! This is great and I will take a look -- but I also think that we should go ahead and publish 1.9.0 without it, since I think we're in a good place, and have lots of other big changes coming. Let me know if you think differently!

@aardvark179
Copy link
Contributor Author

I'll let @balajirrao create a new PR for this since he has done the work to get these changes organised into meaningful commits.

@aardvark179 aardvark179 closed this Jan 7, 2026
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants