[Schamper]

Alternative fix for #169, would make #170 redundant.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

❌ Patch coverage is 0% with 43 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.
✅ Project coverage is 0.00%. Comparing base (2688580) to head (b878600).

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
dissect/cstruct/parser.py	0.00%	26 Missing ⚠️
dissect/cstruct/lexer.py	0.00%	17 Missing ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@          Coverage Diff          @@
##            main    #180   +/-   ##
=====================================
  Coverage   0.00%   0.00%           
=====================================
  Files         22      22           
  Lines       3533    3554   +21     
=====================================
- Misses      3533    3554   +21     

Flag	Coverage Δ
unittests	0.00% <0.00%> (ø)

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Harness.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

• ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.

[codspeed]

Merging this PR will not alter performance

✅ 45 untouched benchmarks
⏩ 47 skipped benchmarks¹

---

_{Comparing lexer-parser-fixes (b878600) with main (2688580)}

Footnotes

1. 47 benchmarks were skipped, so the baseline results were used instead. If they were deleted from the codebase, click here and archive them to remove them from the performance reports. ↩

[yunzheng]

Either something went wrong with the benchmarks or everything got much slower.

[Schamper]

Either something went wrong with the benchmarks or everything got much slower.

I'm pinning it as a CodSpeed fluke with different runners. Merging #178 first should hopefully get us back into a correct state.