ideas VS pydantic

Lower latency native calls in Python would be extremely useful, thank you for your work! Is the following GitHub issue the right place to monitor progress? https://github.com/faster-cpython/ideas/issues/546

I'm open to doing some benchmarking. Several of my libraries have pure CPython bindings (StringZilla, UCall, SimSIMD), and all perform low-latency SIMD-accelerated ops, so might be a good testing ground :)

Recent CPython development has been towards optimizations and addressing use cases that benefit from optimizations, some coming from the faster CPython initiative. You might just get your JIT[1].

[1] https://github.com/faster-cpython/ideas/wiki/Workflow-for-3....

The faster-cpython folks seem to be working towards a JIT (https://github.com/faster-cpython/ideas/tree/main/3.13) and both pyston and cinder have JITs. So I don't think anyone has ruled one out.

faster-cpython team has done a lot of work to experiment on it: https://github.com/faster-cpython/ideas/issues/485#issuecomm...

It kind of sounds like migration to register based is a foregone conclusion, but it's not very clear to me.

lots of big ideas are still remaining to be done. One example is the register based interpreter, see https://github.com/faster-cpython/ideas/issues/485

A previous plan called for the beginning of a JIT in 3.12, seen as "Trace optimized interpreter" here: https://github.com/faster-cpython/ideas/wiki/Workflow-for-3....

First, note the method prefix_allowed_tokens_fn. This method applies a Pydantic model to constrain/guide how the LLM generates tokens. Next, see how that constrain can be applied to txtai's LLM pipeline.

utype is a concise alternative of pydantic with simplified parameters and usages, supporting both sync/async functions and generators parsing, and capable of using native logic operators to define logical types like AND/OR/NOT, also provides custom type parsing by register mechanism that supports libraries like pydantic, attrs and dataclasses

I like some of the changes from v1 to v2. But then you have something like this [0] removed from the library without proper documentation or replacement, resulting in ugly workarounds in the link that wont' work properly.

[0]: https://github.com/pydantic/pydantic/discussions/6337

The easiest implementation I found was to use a PyDantic class for my target schema — and use that as a parameter for the method call to “ChatCompletion.create()”. Here’s a fragment of the GinAI Python classes used.

Also, FastStream uses Pydantic to parse input JSON-encoded data into Python objects, making it easy to work with structured data in your applications, so you can serialize your input messages just using type annotations.

Pydantic Validation: Leverage Pydantic's validation capabilities to serialize and validate incoming messages

Not sure if it is exactly related, but there is an open issue on Github for that exact message.

Well the performance increase is so huge because pydantic1 is really really slow. And for using rust, I'd have expected more tbh…

I've been benchmarking pydantic v2 against typedload (which I write) and despite the rust, it still manages to be slower than pure python in some benchmarks.

The ones on the website are still about comparing to v1 because v2 was not out yet at the time of the last release.

pydantic's author will refuse to benchmark any library that is faster (https://github.com/pydantic/pydantic/pull/3264 https://github.com/pydantic/pydantic/pull/1525 https://github.com/pydantic/pydantic/pull/1810) and keep boasting about amazing performances.

On pypy, v2 beta was really really really slow.