> IMHO breaking free of SQLite's proprietary test suite is a bigger driver than C vs Rust.

I don't understand this claim, given the breadth and depth of SQLite's public domain TCL Tests. Can someone explain to me how this isn't pure FUD?

"There are 51445 distinct test cases, but many of the test cases are parameterized and run multiple times (with different parameters) so that on a full test run millions of separate tests are performed." - https://sqlite.org/testing.html

▲

lmm 5 hours ago | parent | next [-]

The test suite that the actual SQLite developers use to develop SQLite is not open-source. 51445 open-source test cases is a big number but doesn't really mean much, particularly given that evidently the SQLite developers themselves don't consider it enough to provide adequate coverage.

▲

einsteinx2 11 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

The irony is if they only had the public domain tests, no one would complain even though it would mean the exact same number of open source tests.

	▲	dullcrisp 18 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		That’s like if I gave you half the dictionary and then said it’s ironic that if there really weren’t any letters after “M” you wouldn’t be complaining.

▲

Ar-Curunir 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

There are also non-public tests.

▲

digitalPhonix 11 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

The next bullet point:

> 2. The TH3 test harness is a set of proprietary tests…

▲

CharlesW 11 hours ago | parent [-]

Of course, but how does that make the allegation not FUD?

	▲	digitalPhonix 7 hours ago \| parent [-]
		I’m confused, the statement is that SQLite has a proprietary test suite? It does. Where’s the FUD? Turso tried to add features to SQLite in libsqlite but there were bugs/divergent behaviour that they couldn’t reconcile without the full test suite.