> On 4 Nov 2026, at 12:27, Zsolt Parragi <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Tue, 03 Nov 2026, Daniel Gustafsson <[email protected]> wrote: >> I'm not crazy about this part though, I wonder if we should to put a hard cap >> with a ... or something? I'll see what I can come up with. > > We could try that, but then we have to figure out a good maximum, and > that's difficult to do as there are only a few public validator > implementations. > > What do you think about refactoring the function to use > ArrayBuildState instead, that would be a slightly bigger chance but > would result in cleaner code?
After thinking about this some more I think going this route is the better option, even if that means that it will be deferred to v20 at this point. I agree that it would be nice to have the options in the view in 19, but it's not a showstopper. We are very close to release and I don't want us to rush something in which we might want to backtrack on already in 20. -- Daniel Gustafsson
