News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Building SQLite with a small swarm by viraptor on Monday February 16, 2026 @02:22PM (#47039103)
You normally count/test branches at the original language level, not the compiled one. Otherwise we'd get VERY silly results like:

- counting foo().except() as 2 branches

- counting a simple loop as a missed branch, because it got unrolled and you didn't test it with 7,6,5,4,3,2,1 items

- failing on unused straight implementation of memcpy because your CPU supports SIMD and chose that alternative

Etc. The compiled version will be full of code you'll never run regardless of language.

Re:Building SQLite with a small swarm by scott_w on Tuesday February 17, 2026 @02:10AM (#47044584)
That’s not my requirement, that’s SQLite’s requirement. If you want to dispute their claim, I recommend you write to them, however I strongly suspect they know more about this than you do.
Re:Building SQLite with a small swarm by viraptor on Tuesday February 17, 2026 @09:38PM (#47056499)
I know it's on the sqlite side. I'm familiar with the claim and disagree with it.
Re:Building SQLite with a small swarm by scott_w on Wednesday February 18, 2026 @03:02AM (#47058474)
You’re arguing in this context:

> wouldn't the ability to automatically rewrite sqlite in Rust be a valuable asset?

If you want to rewrite SQLite, you must accept their position. Otherwise you simply aren’t rewriting SQLite, you’re writing your own database.

Re:Building SQLite with a small swarm by viraptor on Friday February 20, 2026 @01:06AM (#47084350)
Not having bound checks does not make sqlite sqlite. If that was the case, you couldn't compile it with https://clang.llvm.org/docs/BoundsSafety.html turned on and still call it sqlite for example.