Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

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

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

251–260 of 754 posts

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

#251

Post by qudat »

aurareturn wrote: post #5

6 days of work to do this. Even if it doesn't end up becoming meaningful, it shows just how tokens and work done will be linked now and in the future. It's going to be hard to compete with someone or a company that has more compute. They will just be able to do things you can't.

Nah. These agents are getting easier and easier to run local. Have you tried Qwen 3.6 27b? It’s insane what it can do compared to its size. Like 100% vibe small projects if you manage context properly.

These models are a race to the bottom just like compute.

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

#252

Post by bob001 »

m4rtink wrote: post #117
scared_together wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unlike the GNU coreutils rewrite in Rust, the Bun rewrite in Rust is being undertaken by the owners of the project. That said, yes, you’re correct that Bun isn’t GPL: https://github.com/oven-sh/bun?tab=License-1-ov-file

Hmm, that's unfortunate - why does so much Rust stuff seem to default to MIT/BSD ? Just because Mozilla used that for most of the Rust stuff ? Do developers using Rust even know the difference ? Like how anyone can basically take all you work & base a proprietary fork on it with maybe saying "thanks" (attribution) if they feel like it ? :P

> Like how anyone can basically take all you work & base a proprietary fork on it with maybe saying "thanks" (attribution) if they feel like it ? :P

I'd assume the Bun people got a bit more than a thanks when Anthropic acquired them. :)

You also can't take your GPL code (unless you do CLAs with all contributors), convert it to closed source yourself and make a massive VC funded startup around it. Which is about the only other way anyone makes better money from open source than by just working for a big tech company.

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

#253

Post by mort96 »

fastball wrote: post #232
mort96 wrote: post #231

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Downstream of" is doing a lot of work in that sentence. Language has an effect on, but in no way determines, the reliability of software written in it.

Downstream doesn't imply determinism.

The original claim is one of determinism. Your use of the term "downstream" is hiding the distinction; it can be read in either way, so it bridges the gap between the position you want to defend ("using Zig causes a higher probability of memory bugs") and the position you're forced to defend ("using Zig results in extremely many memory bugs").

In short, I'm accusing you of doing a motte-and-bailey.

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

#254

Post by ameliaquining »

nine_k wrote: post #41

> 99.8% of bun’s pre-existing test suite passes on Linux x64 glibc in the rust rewrite OK, they've got a working prototype, congrats! Now it needs to be put into shape so that all the unsafe blocks are eliminated (maybe with a few tiny exceptions), and the code is turned into maintainable, readable, reasonably idiomatic Rust. I wonder how long is it going to take.

This is the kind of program that would need to have a lot of unsafe even if it had been written in Rust from the very beginning. For comparison, there are about 2600 unsafe blocks in Deno, not counting dependencies.

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

#255

Post by tracerbulletx »

dzonga wrote: post #212
4aksh19 wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"No one has the intention of building a wall" - Walter Ulbricht, chairman of the central committee, a couple of months before the Berlin Wall was built. The AI companies and their associates are beginning to surpass that level of denials and lies.

you know this whole exercise is both a marketing exercise and a way to make noise. would the world come to a standstill tomorrow if every Bun instance out there ran on Node.js ? they know their A.I can't sell without the noise that it's now on the edge of the frontier. this is hype. zig adopting a strict 'no LLM' policy affects the LLM vendors.

If you think Claude needs manufactured hype at this point to sell it you're delusional.

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

#256

Post by gobdovan »

Jarred wrote: post #105
legerdemain wrote: post #38

From 4 days ago: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48019226 > I work on Bun and this is my branch > > This 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 i…

cargo check reported over 16,000 compiler errors when I wrote that message. It could not print a version number or run JavaScript. I didn’t expect it to work this quickly and I also didn’t expect the performance to be as competitive. There’ll be a blog post with more details.

If this experiment ends up resulting in a real migration path, I think that would be completely awesome. Maybe it means we have a chance to revive older projects such as ngspice [0], but with modern affordances and better safety properties.

From your post, though, it sounds like Bun may have been a pretty direct rewrite, without too many hard choices along the way. Is that fair?

[0] https://ngspice.sourceforge.io/

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

#258

Post by tempaccount5050 »

lioeters wrote: post #244
legerdemain wrote: post #38

From 4 days ago: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48019226 > I work on Bun and this is my branch > > This 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 i…

Also a few days before that: > I expect OSS to go the opposite direction: no human contribution allowed. Slop will be a nostalgic relic of 2025 & 2026. We should have seen this coming after they got acquired by Anthropic, but it's still disappointing. I'm not against large language models as a technology, just thoroughly disgusted how these "AI" companies rose to power, eating the software industry and the rest of so…

Software companies have been about automating human labor since the invention of computers. It's the whole damn point. Why do you think finance used to be (sometimes still is) the head of the IT dept? Because we automated accounting away. Then typists. Then secretaries. Then drafting. Etc etc.

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

#259

Post by mezyt »

Aurornis wrote: post #156
aurareturn wrote: post #5

6 days of work to do this. Even if it doesn't end up becoming meaningful, it shows just how tokens and work done will be linked now and in the future. It's going to be hard to compete with someone or a company that has more compute. They will just be able to do things you can't.

Translating a project that includes a good test suite from one language to another is known to be a great case where LLMs work well. When you’re starting with a complete codebase to use as an example and a test suite to check everything it’s much easier to iterate toward the desired goal. The LLM can already see what the goals are and how they’ve been implemented once already, which is a much easier problem than star…

Great case where rust works well too. I won't cite every famous libs that got rewritten in rust but it wasn't all with LLM.

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

#260

Post by onlyrealcuzzo »

adsharma wrote: post #183
onlyrealcuzzo wrote: post #88

And here I am trying to get an LLM to add types to a 100k line Ruby repository for 2 days, and it's not going so hot...

A SMT solver may work better.

Will that work if my codebase is filled with nils it shouldn't be filled with, and HashMaps instead of structs with a loosely defined schema, and tuples masquerading as arrays?
Post reply on HN