Is 4096 types enough for everyone?
https://github.com/apache/fory/blob/fd1d53bd0fbbc5e0ce6d53ef...
 replies(1): 
  Technical approach: compile-time codegen (no reflection), compact binary protocol with meta-packing, little-endian layout optimized for modern CPUs.
  Unique features that other fast serializers don't have:
  - Cross-language without IDL files (Rust ↔ Python/Java/Go)
  - Trait object serialization (Box<dyn Trait>)
  - Automatic circular reference handling
  - Schema evolution without coordination
  Happy to discuss design trade-offs.
  Benchmarks: https://fory.apache.org/docs/benchmarks/rusthttps://github.com/apache/fory/blob/fd1d53bd0fbbc5e0ce6d53ef...
I’m curious though: what’s an example scenario you’ve seen that requires so many distinct types? I haven’t personally come across a case with 4,096+ protocol messages defined.
    git clone https://github.com/googleapis/googleapis.git
    cd googleapis
    find . -name '*.proto' -and -not -name '*test*' -and -not -name '*example*' -exec grep '^message' {} \; | wc -l
https://github.com/apache/fory/issues/2818
But now I do see that the 4096 is just arbitrary:
    If schema consistent mode is enabled globally when creating fory, type meta will be written as a fory unsigned varint of type_id. Schema evolution related meta will be ignored.