Hi from the maintainer of the json-repair library
mangiucugna opened this issue · comments
Hi! I saw that you are using the library and that is great!
I was wondering why you decided to reimplement the repair_json method instead of calling the one provided, it's because the preprocessing done to the string breaks something? It's because of lazy loading?
Just wondering if there's something I can learn to improve the lib
Cheers
Hey @mangiucugna , thanks for reaching out, and for the library :) I tried multiple solutions but your works better than others.
That way, I'd not need to do json.loads two times. I want repair to be optional feature. Have you considered using orjson to speed it up?
Cheers
I was expecting that json.load() to be the reason :)
Would be adding an option to skip the json.load() a good option for you? Something like 'skip_json_load=True'.
The reason why I decided against orjson is that I wanted to keep the library without external dependencies, especially orjson bring pyO3 that sometimes doesn't play well with some other libraries.
If you like the idea, I will release 0.4.0 (I recently released 0.3.0 to fix some reported issues with llama) and if you have suggestions please do let me know!
Sounds like a plan! I will make a change once you have the new version :) Thank you!
FYI I was intrigued about the performance of the library so I did some profiling and found a way to make it 20% faster, small numbers for small JSON size but it's quite significant if you have large strings or doing large batch jobs.
So yeah, 0.4.1 is out
Awesome! Updated the library to use your exported function. Thank you!
cheers!