> 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 ben

> 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 https://github.com/ltworf/typedload/pull/422)