Not to throw shade, just wishing that somebody here can understand. Whenever an input is reasonably long, an analyzing function will crash, and this PR aims to fix that with a mechanism that contradicts the maintainer’s understanding while a similar C implementation does not need this fix. Clearly, the maintainer has not heard a certain programming mantra…
What mantra? I think this maintainer is doing the right thing here by trying to understand why this fix works.
You should always attempt to address the root cause of an issue instead of slapping band aid patches onto everything.
To me it looks like the maintainer is trying to find out what exactly is wrong. “this doesn’t happen in our C implementation” implies that there’s something wrong with the rust code specifically.