sqlite: add virtual table support via createModule()

[TrevorBurnham]

Fixes#61539

This PR is a continuation of #61544 by @byteforge38, which became inactive.

It exposes SQLite's virtual table API through a new database.createModule(name, options) method, wrapping sqlite3_create_module_v2().

This PR enables read-only virtual tables backed by JavaScript data sources. A registered module can be used two ways:

• Eponymous table: query the module name directly (SELECT * FROM module_name).
• Named virtual table: CREATE VIRTUAL TABLE t USING module_name.

Hidden columns pass parameters via table-valued function syntax (SELECT * FROM module_name(param1, param2)).

options accepts columns, rows, directOnly, and useBigIntArguments.

Note: column affinity

A virtual table doesn't apply column affinity to the values xColumn returns, which makes declared types behave differently than they do on an ordinary table:

// real table: affinity converts the bound doubledb.exec('CREATE TABLE t(v INTEGER)');db.prepare('INSERT INTO t VALUES (?)').run(7);db.prepare('SELECT typeof(v) FROM t').get();// 'integer'// virtual table: no affinity applieddb.createModule('gs',{columns: [{name: 'v',type: 'INTEGER'}],*rows(){yield[7];}});db.prepare('SELECT typeof(v) FROM gs').get();// 'real'

This follows from the conversion rules discussed in #63826: A number is bound as REAL, a bigint as INTEGER. Value-based coercion would make it impossible to yield 666.0 into a REAL column, and bigint already gives callers explicit control.

Coercing to the declared type would be a different mechanism, driven by explicit intent rather than by guessing from the value, and it would leave REAL columns alone. But SQLite core doesn't do this for virtual tables (generate_series returns integers because it calls sqlite3_result_int64, not via affinity), and it adds per-cell cost.

I've documented the current behavior rather than changing it, since coercing to the declared type is behavior SQLite core doesn't have for virtual tables.

[nodejs-github-bot]

Review requested:

• @nodejs/sqlite

[codecov]

Codecov Report

❌ Patch coverage is 81.25000% with 87 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.
✅ Project coverage is 90.12%. Comparing base (68e0ce0) to head (89b3a3a).
⚠️ Report is 2 commits behind head on main.

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
src/node_sqlite.cc	80.96%	44 Missing and 43 partials ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@ Coverage Diff @@## main #65787 +/- ##
==========================================
- Coverage 90.13% 90.12% -0.02% 
==========================================
Files 769 769 Lines 261645 262109 +464 Branches 49671 49755 +84 ==========================================
+ Hits 235831 236217 +386 - Misses 16845 16856 +11 - Partials 8969 9036 +67 

Files with missing lines	Coverage Δ
src/node_sqlite.h	87.27% <100.00%> (+0.86%)	⬆️
src/node_sqlite.cc	82.04% <80.96%> (-0.20%)	⬇️

... and 36 files with indirect coverage changes

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

• ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.
• 📦 JS Bundle Analysis: Save yourself from yourself by tracking and limiting bundle sizes in JS merges.