Earlier quoted context omitted.
So if tomorrow Rust denied the "improvement" to upstream Rust then what's the next language they plan to vibe code it in?
Perl
Zig → Rust porting guide
311–320 of 592 posts
Re: Zig → Rust porting guide
#312Its never been easier to rewrite X in Rust than today. Will everything eventually be rewritten in Rust and we finally achieve utopia?
Re: Zig → Rust porting guide
#313Re: Zig → Rust porting guide
#314Re: Zig → Rust porting guide
#315>*No `tokio`, `rayon`, `hyper`, `async-trait`, `futures`.* No `std::fs`, I'm not a rust dev but even I kind of notice that tokio is kind of shunned in most projects. Why is that? Is it just bad or what?
But as soon as you need something that doesn’t fit neatly into the abstractions they provide, even something as seemingly simple as proactively reusing or cancelling sessions, things quickly become extremely complicated, inefficient, and unreliable.
For high-performance servers, where you really care about raw performance, DoS resistance, and taking advantage of modern kernel features, these abstractions can become a major limitation.
It’s a bit like using an ORM that gives you no easy way to send raw SQL queries. It works fine for common cases, even if it’s not always optimal. But when you really want to take advantage of what the database can do, you usually avoid the ORM.
Re: Zig → Rust porting guide
#316People are asking why they would switch from zig to rust. I wonder the opposite: why would anyone would use zig over rust?
Re: Zig → Rust porting guide
#317Why not rewrite claude-code in Rust? So, Anthropic acquires Bun team because claude-code uses Bun. They port Bun from Zig to Rust presumably because Rust "is better" (imagine big air quotes here). Again presumably, they want to make claude-code "better". Why make it so complicated? With all the power of LLMs they have, surely they can make claude-code the best possible by writting it in Rust directly.
Re: Zig → Rust porting guide
#318Rewriting it using an LLM is one. But did all the contributors became as proficient in Rust as they were in Zig over night as well?
They are owned by Anthropic. They have virtually unlimited Claude credits.
Re: Zig → Rust porting guide
#319This whole thread is an overreaction. 302 comments about code that does not work. We haven’t committed to rewriting. There’s a very high chance all this code gets thrown out completely.
I’m curious to see what a working version of this looks, what it feels like, how it performs and if/how hard it’d be to get it to pass Bun’s test suite and be maintainable. I’d like to be able to compare a viable Rust version and a Zig version side by side.
Re: Zig → Rust porting guide
#320Earlier quoted context omitted.
They recently tried to upstream an improvement to zig, but were prevented from doing so because zig has a hard and fast "no AI code" rule. Whether you think this response is trying to put pressure on zig or whether they're just moving for practical reasons is up to you. It's probably a bit of both.
Not only because the AI part, here's a discussion [0] about it [0] https://ziggit.dev/t/bun-s-zig-fork-got-4x-faster-compilatio...
I love Rust, but you couldn't pick a language with slower compile times... XD