On Mon, Aug 17, 2026, at 3:39 PM, سپهر محمودی wrote: > Hi Larry, > > Apologies — my previous message was addressed to Rowan by mistake, > > but it was meant as a reply to the thread, and I was also responding > > to your point. Both of your feedback is very helpful. > > Thanks again for taking the time to share your thoughts. > > Regards, > > Sepehr
First, please do not top post. > On دوشنبه ۱۷ اوت ۲۰۲۶، ۲۳:۵۵ سپهر محمودی <[email protected]> wrote: >> I’d be genuinely interested in your opinion on the best path forward: >> 1. Should we proceed with array_search_range() as a focused addition >> now, and explore “lazy array slice” as a separate, broader RFC? >> 2. Or do you think it would be better to fold this idea into the >> larger concept from the start? >> >> Either way, I’m happy to collaborate and learn from the discussion. >> >> Regards, >> >> Sepehr I would favor shelving this idea for now, and instead putting effort into the more robust solution that would benefit everything at once. If you have a specific use case yourself where this would actually make a big performance difference (which I do not believe is the typical case), then a custom extension with a single function seems like it would be pretty easy, especially if you've already built it as a patch. --Larry Garfield
