Live data from Hacker News

Bun's experimental Rust rewrite hits 99.8% test compatibility on Linux x64 glibc

twitter.com

81–90 of 754 posts

Re: Bun's experimental Rust rewrite hits 99.8% test compatibility on Linux x64 glibc

#81
post #53

Being anthropic accuired project does he have access to mythos or it’s normal Claude we plebs have access to

As an Anthropic acquihire, not only does he have access to every model and service but he probably has infinite tokens available. Bun powers Claude.

Also, isn't it a great ad for Anthropic itself? One wonders

Re: Bun's experimental Rust rewrite hits 99.8% test compatibility on Linux x64 glibc

#82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah but with no guarantee that it was going to work, why should he have?

Yeah, but he obviously had enough confidence in this project to keep the agents working at it, didn't he? Given infinite time and money, if you prompt an LLM about something enough times, it will eventually work. Insert something about monkeys, typewriters, and Shakespeare here .

But you didn’t have to sit and type. Assuming that you look at what it did, why not?

Re: Bun's experimental Rust rewrite hits 99.8% test compatibility on Linux x64 glibc

#84
post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Zig is a great low-level language. It's much better than C, while not being so much larger as e.g. Rust or C++. AFAICT Zig does well in embedded development, and should continue to do so. Note that Zig is not even 1.0 yet.

Yeah but now they got the fame of the language that fumbled the ball because of an overly onerous anti-AI stance.

It's been repeated many times that the rejection of the Bun PR was unrelated to their AI-policy. It's also not clear they've "fumbled the ball" given how many projects are complaining about slop PRs.

Re: Bun's experimental Rust rewrite hits 99.8% test compatibility on Linux x64 glibc

#85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is your claim that using Zig ends in an "extremely high amount of crashes/memory bugs?" Wouldn't that mean that it isn't even feasible to make high-quality software with such a tool? There is a lot of quality stuff made with C/C++, so what is Zig doing wrong?

it's feasible to write good software but anything on the scale of millions of lines of code will have memory and pointer issues. I've worked in large C++ code bases with people much more experienced and skilled than I was and every single one of them would tell you that at that scale, no matter how economic and simple you program you will produce memory bugs, the smartest person in the world makes errors holding that…

This is correct but people with too big of an ego or affected too much by Dunning-Kruger) will try to say otherwise even when presented with ample evidence. Instead of a valid response you'll get "skill issue" from people that produce segfaulting code on a regular basis.

Re: Bun's experimental Rust rewrite hits 99.8% test compatibility on Linux x64 glibc

#86

I just want to comment that I think it's a good change if we look past the AI involvement. Bun has had an extremely high amount of crashes/memory bugs due to them using Zig, unlike Deno which is Rust. Of course, if Bun's Rust port has tons of `unsafe`, it won't magically solve them all, but it'll still get better

Is your claim that using Zig ends in an "extremely high amount of crashes/memory bugs?" Wouldn't that mean that it isn't even feasible to make high-quality software with such a tool? There is a lot of quality stuff made with C/C++, so what is Zig doing wrong?

> Wouldn't that mean that it isn't even feasible to make high-quality software with such a tool?

plenty of other companies/entities making high quality software in zig? tigerbeetle, zig itself for example.

Bun's entire history has been a kind of haphazard move as fast as you can story, so...

Re: Bun's experimental Rust rewrite hits 99.8% test compatibility on Linux x64 glibc

#87
post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is your claim that using Zig ends in an "extremely high amount of crashes/memory bugs?" Wouldn't that mean that it isn't even feasible to make high-quality software with such a tool? There is a lot of quality stuff made with C/C++, so what is Zig doing wrong?

> There is a lot of quality stuff made with C/C++ There’s a lot of leaky crap written in those languages too. One of the core promises of Rust is that the compiler will catch memory issues other languages won’t experience until runtime. If Zig doesn’t offer something similar it’ll make Rust very compelling.

rust does not promise leak safety.

Re: Bun's experimental Rust rewrite hits 99.8% test compatibility on Linux x64 glibc

#89
post #30

What does this mean for Zig? Few big popular projects use Zig, if they start to move away from it, what Zig's future will look like?

Jarred has already said on Twitter that this was only an experiment for comparisons and very, very unlikely that they'd switch to Rust.
Post reply on HN