pydantic-core VS pydantic

Funny that you ask... https://github.com/pydantic/pydantic-core Unfortunately it seems that the functionality you ask for is not (yet) part of this ...

I encourage you to checkout the official benchmarks for more realistic and detailed examples, and, as always, YMMV.

> to also be constrained by a separate set of data types which are legal in rust.

This isn't really how writing rust/python iterop works. You tend to have opaque handles you call python methods on. Here's a decent example I found skimming the code.

https://github.com/pydantic/pydantic-core/blob/main/src/inpu...

Thanks for pointing out to that, I did not know about it. Also attaching repo in case someone would be interested as well - https://github.com/pydantic/pydantic-core

pydantic-core: The core validation logic for pydantic, a Python data parsing and validation library.

pydandic-core [0] will hopefully solve this issue (written in Rust)

[0] -- https://github.com/pydantic/pydantic-core

LinkedIn influencers are weird lol. Rust v Python is apples and oranges. Rust would be glued together by python just like it does with C/C++ and Java/Spark today. We’re already seeing some packages go this direction, like pydantic v2 is rewriting its core validation in rust.

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.