CodSpeed Performance Report

Merging#10834 willnot alter performance

_{Comparingandresliszt:add/compare-as (35f2f43) withmain (9783bc8)}

Summary

✅ 43 untouched benchmarks

Coverage report

Click to see where and how coverage changed

File	Statements	Missing	Coverage	Coverage (new stmts)	Lines missing
pydantic
fields.py
main.py
Project Total

This report was generated bypython-coverage-comment-action

please review

@andresliszt,

Thanks for the PR. Looks like there are a couple of solutions available on this front, including this one, plus:

• Fixexclude_defaults when value's__eq__ method raises an exception. pydantic-core#1490
• add default comparison pydantic-core#1114

Sorry for our review delays here. I've pinged@davidhewitt to see what he thinks regarding the best way forward here. We're eager to get a fix for this / related issues into v2.11!

@andresliszt,

Thanks for the PR. Looks like there are a couple of solutions available on this front, including this one, plus:

• Fixexclude_defaults when value's__eq__ method raises an exception. pydantic-core#1490
• add default comparison pydantic-core#1114

Sorry for our review delays here. I've pinged@davidhewitt to see what he thinks regarding the best way forward here. We're eager to get a fix for this / related issues into v2.11!

Nice! Yeah I opennedadd default comparison, this is a generalization. In that PR the callable was used only to compare default values, which is done in Rust. Thecompare_as callable is used in the pydanticBaseModel.__eq__ and also can be forwarded to the Rust side to exclude default values.

Cool. I think we want to move forward with an approach similar to this one. We're pushing outv2.10 mid week this week, but would love to help get this into v2.11, so will be more active in helping get this across the line after the release :)