[GLD Serializer Benchmark] Python flexbuffers — spec compliance misses
Hi — this is a friendly report from the GLD Serializer Benchmark, an independent multi-language suite that times serializers and checks them against the published format specs (RFC 8259, YAML 1.2, …).
We measured flexbuffers the pin this suite last measured on Python. The suite recorded spec-profile misses for this pin. The catalog is report-only: a miss is not a CI failure, and some cases are older or stricter profiles (for example RFC 4627 vs RFC 8259) rather than a crash.
Compliance results (please start here)
This link opens the live heatmap on Python with flexbuffers already selected (All standards). Click a scored cell for each FAIL and the cited spec paragraph:
https://leo-gan.github.io/GLD.SerializerBenchmark/dashboard/#compliance/python/flexbuffers
How the catalog is built, and how to read a FAIL line:
- https://leo-gan.github.io/GLD.SerializerBenchmark/compliance/
- https://leo-gan.github.io/GLD.SerializerBenchmark/compliance/reading-results/
I am not pasting the case list here so you can use the Dashboard (filters, heatmap, and spec links) rather than a static dump.
Optional: one standard family only — #compliance/python/flexbuffers/json (or yaml, cbor, …).
Benchmark timings (same pin)
The same suite also publishes encode / decode time and payload size for this library on Python:
Details table (this library pre-selected):
That page is the live L1 snapshot, not a claim that one library is “best.”
Ask
Please look at the Compliance view for flexbuffers. If a miss is a real decoder/encoder bug you want to fix, great. If it is an intentional default (accepting NaN, YAML 1.1 bools, …), a short note here is enough — we will keep the catalog as-is unless the library’s documented contract changes.
Thanks for the library.
Source: google/flatbuffers