[localhoster]

It's so hard to trust a vibe coded software with something with a thing as valuable as data.

I see no reason why would anyone even bother checking this out, while there a trusted, battle scared, and non vibe-coded alternatives such as postgres, duckdb,boltdb,SQLite.

Sorry mate.

[Gerharddc]

Yeah it seems pretty insane to use a vibe-coded storage engine unless you had no other option

[br1]

Formal verification should catch vibe coding bugs.

[sangel]

This is the entire formal verification effort, as far as I can tell: https://codeberg.org/gregburd/aether/src/branch/main/aether/...

They use TLA+ with TLC which model checks the write ahead log (a component of the system). But that only models the WAL protocol, not the actual Rust code and not the other 99% of the system.

Any formal verification is of course awesome to see though.

[onair4you]

I have to admit I used to think any level of formal verification was worthwhile.

But I recently tried having agents try starting with formal models, and then building code using that as basis. In the end to models were never detailed enough to catch the most common issues that were shaken out with getting a high level of coverage and mutation testing.

At which point, the predictive power of the formal models became somewhat vacuous.

I’m trying to be more optimistic that maybe using dependently typed languages will yield better results.

[whattheheckheck]

And just because you model the system in tla+ and its a valid model doesn't mean the vibe coded implementation matches the tla+ model

[oinoom]

The part that’s not clear to me is, does the spec actually align with what’s been implemented, or has the spec only been formally verified. I think the risk with vibe coding this sort of thing is that claude assures you the rust code implements the spec when it doesn’t