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 zig-msgpack 0.0.18 on Zig. 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 Zig with zig-msgpack 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/zig/zig-msgpack
How the catalog is built, and how to read a FAIL line:
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/zig/zig-msgpack/json (or yaml, cbor, …).
Benchmark timings (same pin)
The same suite also publishes encode / decode time and payload size for this library on Zig:
https://leo-gan.github.io/GLD.SerializerBenchmark/dashboard/?lang=zig&data=document@n=1&mode=bytes#dashboard
Details table (this library pre-selected):
https://leo-gan.github.io/GLD.SerializerBenchmark/dashboard/?lang=zig&ser=zig-msgpack&data=document@n=1&mode=bytes#detailed-analytics
That page is the live L1 snapshot, not a claim that one library is “best.”
Ask
Please look at the Compliance view for zig-msgpack. 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.
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 zig-msgpack 0.0.18 on Zig. 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 Zig with zig-msgpack 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/zig/zig-msgpack
How the catalog is built, and how to read a FAIL line:
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/zig/zig-msgpack/json(oryaml,cbor, …).Benchmark timings (same pin)
The same suite also publishes encode / decode time and payload size for this library on Zig:
https://leo-gan.github.io/GLD.SerializerBenchmark/dashboard/?lang=zig&data=document@n=1&mode=bytes#dashboard
Details table (this library pre-selected):
https://leo-gan.github.io/GLD.SerializerBenchmark/dashboard/?lang=zig&ser=zig-msgpack&data=document@n=1&mode=bytes#detailed-analytics
That page is the live L1 snapshot, not a claim that one library is “best.”
Ask
Please look at the Compliance view for zig-msgpack. 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.