-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 6.6k
enhance make #37097
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Draft
bircni
wants to merge
1
commit into
go-gitea:main
Choose a base branch
from
bircni:feature/enhance-make
base: main
Could not load branches
Branch not found: {{ refName }}
Loading
Could not load tags
Nothing to show
Loading
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Some commits from the old base branch may be removed from the timeline,
and old review comments may become outdated.
+30
−2
Draft
enhance make #37097
Changes from all commits
Commits
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Off-topic: maybe it should really introduce this: WIP: Pure Go SQLite3 #32628 , then no build tag is needed anymore.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
afaik you were sort of against it - #20614 (comment)
I wouldn't mind having sqlite built-in without tags though.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
The wasm one isn't like that CCGO based "pure Go" solution. The wasm one is 100% (at least >99%) complied from official SQLite C code, so I would consider it as safe and stable enough for production.
I was just against CCGO at that time 😄
To explain more for WASM ecosystem: mature compiler, mature VM. CCGO is cool and awesome, wasm is the future (IMHO)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
My bad! I assumed this was the same solution (modernrc) and did not look at what it's imported in your PR (ncruces).
seems decent. At least better for us since we don't have to support sqlite tags.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Update: it seems that ncruces changed its solution.
Still, modernrc CCGO is much more complicated than ncruces wasm2go 🤣
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
we call it "modernc", its package is modernc.org/sqlite
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Right, the module path still is that: https://gitlab.com/cznic/sqlite/-/blob/master/go.mod#L1
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
ncruces seems slower to compile from scratch. Not a big issue though. It requires one less workaround but the changes in how parameters are passed seem the same.
Size diff (same base, only changed enough to get it compiling and browsable):
+6MB on ncruces
+1.1MB on modernrc
Respective branches:
https://github.com/TheFox0x7/gitea/tree/modernrc-sqlite
https://github.com/TheFox0x7/gitea/tree/ncurces-sqlite
Let me know if you have something I should try or which one to start as draft
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Some benchmarks at https://github.com/cvilsmeier/go-sqlite-bench, modernc seems slightly faster on average.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
modernc +1